Re: Internet Professionals

Craig and the Guild members:
First of all this was not Spam. We felt this would be a good list to post
to, so we can find people to help out and maybe join before the rush is on.
We knew if members are good enough at critiquing then they should be good
enough to code!

As far as critiquing the site: Look at the meta tags: Generator="Front Page
3.0"
That explains it all! This page was put up to block directory browsing. That
is all this page is for.

Hopefully you and the group will revisit in about 3 weeks and check out this
association and see why we are there for you!

Sincerely,

Christopher Barrett
-----Original Message-----
From: Craig T. Harding <guide(at)ao.net>
To: Christopher Barrett <noc(at)socos.com>
Cc: hwg-critique(at)hwg.org <hwg-critique(at)hwg.org>
Date: Friday, April 10, 1998 8:37 AM
Subject: Re: Internet Professionals


Christopher Barrett wrote:
> it. www.iprofessionals.net or IP# 204.117.42.70
> We (3 internet professionals) have thought about starting this web site
for
> about 3 yrs and have come up with a plan to be based on.

After reading your post and knowing that no professional would SPAM the
mail list of the HTML Writer's Guild, I assume that you're interested in
a critique of your site.

Your IP worked but your address had no DNS entry. Though I could ping
204.117.42.70, I could not resolve the IP.

First let me validate your code. Because of a lack of doctype, I assume
that you wish to use HTML 3.2. Using this I found 2 errors in your code.
line 10: there is no attribute "FACE"
line 15: there is no attribute "BGCOLOR"

A more professional approach would have been to notice that your WYSIWYG
editor "Front Page" does not include a doctype, and include the one you
want used.

None of your links worked. A professional would never include
non-working links. Consider removing them until they are ready for
publication.

IMO, a black background is very clich� on the web. It carries a newbie
stigma about it and IMO is a bad choice for a supposed professional
location. Consider redesigning with a color combinations that is more
easily read at high resolutions. Green on gray or black is a little
rough on the eyes.

Opera 3.0 failed to implement your tables in the same way as Netscape
4.04 or MSIE 4.0. You might want to take a look at that.

For some reason your tables were of different length at high resolutions
because you failed to constrain them allowing them to base their width
on content length. Gives it a lop-sided look at 1024x768.

Consider changing the link color from hot-pink not only because of the
stigma but also because it is hard to read against about any background.
If a visitor were to print the page, that color would grayscale
inappropriately on a laser printer.

In my opinion, this site is lacking in appeal to the graphical user
because of the lack of images. Please consider adding something to spice
up the page. With no links and no content, a picture might help. It's
extremely boring at this time.

Overall, this site lacks nearly everything that it takes to be
considered for internet surfing. No links, no content, and no imagery.
It seems to be a place to house a persons email address only. Consider
revamping and adding a little meat before resubmitting for a critique on
this list.
--
Craig T. Harding
Webmaster Server7 & Netsolutions
University of Central Florida - College of Computer Science
http://www.ao.net/~guide ** http://pegasus.cc.ucf.edu/~cth87281
ICQ - 1204959
Webring - Poorly designed web sites linked by a common thread.
Web Awards - See Webring

HTML: hwg-critique mailing list archives, maintained by Webmaster @ IWA