Talk:Groups
From Plastic Tub
| Revision as of 22:02, 29 Jun 2005 Payne (Talk | contribs) tbl convert successful; could use more work ← Go to previous diff |
Revision as of 00:31, 8 Jul 2005 Payne (Talk | contribs) an idea for your consideration Go to next diff → |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
| -- [[User:Payne|Payne]] 18:02, 29 Jun 2005 (EDT): i've converted this to a table format, but it could use a defter hand than mine, so please, everyone -- edit away! i'm going to start monkeying with the content a bit. | -- [[User:Payne|Payne]] 18:02, 29 Jun 2005 (EDT): i've converted this to a table format, but it could use a defter hand than mine, so please, everyone -- edit away! i'm going to start monkeying with the content a bit. | ||
| + | |||
| + | -- [[User:Payne|Payne]] 20:31, 7 Jul 2005 (EDT) Hey, I have an idea, but I can't decide if I like it or not. What if instead of calling these "portals" we presented these as broadsides? We could even come up with a cover story under [[Broadsides]] explaining how we latter day [[AA]]ers collaborated on a series of broadsides to publicize some of our research. Then we could work on the content and format to make it broadside-ish, like the NY Times or like [http://www.artsandlettersdaily.com/ Arts & Letters Daily]. The format wouldn't be terribly different than the current format (e.g., several columns sandwiched by a header and footer). The content could be altered a bit -- it should be big on breadth and light on depth: pretty much just a bunch of leads meant to entice people to read more on other pages on this site. I'll scrape something together and post it up here as soon as I get the chance. Let me know what you think of it. | ||
Revision as of 00:31, 8 Jul 2005
that's a nice start! I like this portal thing more and more -- but I think you should use a table format instead of divs, but that's my preference really. Tables are solid, predictable, safe, the div tag can freak the fuck out so easily on cross browsers, etc, kind of like what's happening with the pictures in the current example. I could make a table version, perhaps. But whole layout/scheme is coolness in my book. Good stuff -- a pertinent step forward.
-- Payne 14:15, 28 Jun 2005 (EDT): i started converting this to a table format. it definitely seems to be behaving better. i'm clumsy with the html tags, but i'll keep slogging away at it. lemme know if you see me doing something weird/dumb. i'm headed to florida for a long weekend & will be off line, so it may take a bit. i still have lots of ideas for the content of this page, other portals, and how to link this up to the main page. could be a lot of work, but i think it's off to a good start.
-- Payne 18:02, 29 Jun 2005 (EDT): i've converted this to a table format, but it could use a defter hand than mine, so please, everyone -- edit away! i'm going to start monkeying with the content a bit.
-- Payne 20:31, 7 Jul 2005 (EDT) Hey, I have an idea, but I can't decide if I like it or not. What if instead of calling these "portals" we presented these as broadsides? We could even come up with a cover story under Broadsides explaining how we latter day AAers collaborated on a series of broadsides to publicize some of our research. Then we could work on the content and format to make it broadside-ish, like the NY Times or like Arts & Letters Daily (http://www.artsandlettersdaily.com/). The format wouldn't be terribly different than the current format (e.g., several columns sandwiched by a header and footer). The content could be altered a bit -- it should be big on breadth and light on depth: pretty much just a bunch of leads meant to entice people to read more on other pages on this site. I'll scrape something together and post it up here as soon as I get the chance. Let me know what you think of it.
