Sorry. It was ten minutes late. More coming online as you read this.
Comments working, search working, contact form working, about page working...
Everything now except the archive pages.
shouldn't your title bar just say 12 instead of 11.5 and 12? That's just confusing...
Also you're using Mystery Meat Navigation (http://www.webpagesthatsuck.com/mysterymeatnavigation.html)
bad!!! AND we still have to put our email addresses & URL's in
Oh benjamin alexander, will you never learn!
If this was a website for a company aimed at clients this would be an issue, however it is not. It is not hiding any useful information. I will be as mysterious as I it is my own personal website and the design is part of the content as opposed to just enabling the content.
Anyway if you mouse over it's fine. Plus it's fully accessible. Mwahahaha.
And I will turn off requiring e-mail addresses soon enough, but they never show up, which is a good thing.
E-mail addresses in comments are fixed.
But waht about the sheep?????
I dont like it :'(.
Ohh and in other news i no longer have a girlfriend.
No sheep. And really?
Yes really. Its not the missing sheep. Its the wide space over here >
Needs filling up with something.
Ah well, that'll vary. The problem is if I fill it up (which I agree, would be nice) people using 800x600 will moan. It's okay in 1024x800 but I imagine it looks a bit annoying in any higher res. I may fiddle with it a bit. But I don't want it to be all fubar for poor low res people.
Just curious, do sup and sub work?
i always like new versions and this is no different, so congratulations (in a high pitched , mario kart 64 type way)
OK well I'll let you off the mystery meat thing, hehe... still, personally I prefer links that clearly tell you what they're linking to, but hey it's your website & I can live with it :)
lol @ using my full name (well most of it anyway), everyone seems to do that with me when they're telling me off, its sheer length seems to have an effect :P
You could defualt to optimising for 1024x768 screens, and have a little link somewhere on the screen saying "does this display properly?" upon which it will display in a mode that's best for 800x640. I did do this for my website, can't remember if I changed it or not. Anyway my website doesn't care too much how it looks. Like me.
Please give us lots of update on the O2 scenario, it's a real life soap story, I come home every day and check if there's any more news on it, hehe. Maybe I should get one of those life thingys...
mmmm mario kart
I use 1280*1024 but I always have the browser smaller than that - so it's not just 800*600 people you have to deal with.
Incidently, I'm still trying to figure the design out. Is there any logic to the changes in design? :)
I'm thinking I'm down with the whole "make it bigger" movement. I'm going to take a few screen shots in 800x600 and then I'll push it as far as possible in that. Hopefully that should give me an extra 100px or so.
But...but...empty space!
And no sheep of course. :(
This is a website by Mark Walley. If you want to find out more or get in touch, that'd be nice.
Getting around this website can be a tad confusing. If you're looking to explore the better stuff of what I've written then this navigation should help you. If you're after a specific post then searching or looking through the archives chronologically may help.
This site tries its best to be accessible for everyone. Atom, and RSS feeds are available. All content licensed through a creative commons licence. I may have stolen ideas off you when you weren't looking, but it was almost certainly an accident. As with all claims of originality and ownership Psalm 24 v1 applies.
Sparticus
Think I ought to test the comments really.