cwdjrxyz wrote:
> I have put your FAQs on a test web page to see how it might work. See
> at http://www.cwdjr.info/wine/FAQ.php .

Many thanks!

I think that the font size and color scheme look fine, but I would
suggest that the main entries in the Table of Contents should be left
justified, not centered, and the subtopics could be indented by a tab
stop or so. I like the overall organization as well as the use of
links. Perhaps when the main TOC entries are used in the body, we
should lose the numbers that precede them? That's a judgement call IMO.

Thanks again,
Mark Lipton

> I think that the font size and color scheme look fine

Much improved over the light on dark. Why not leave the background white though? Better contrast and easier to read. Light grey doesn't add anything IMHO.

> I would
> suggest that the main entries in the Table of Contents should be left
> justified, not centered , and the subtopics could be indented by a tab
> stop or so.

Agreed.

> Perhaps when the main TOC entries are used in the body, we
> should lose the numbers that precede them? That's a judgement call IMO.

I find the numbers useful. They may be a pain to maintain, should a topic be inserted later on.

Jose
--
There are more ways to skin a cat than there are cats.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Mark Lipton wrote:
> cwdjrxyz wrote:
> > I have put your FAQs on a test web page to see how it might work. See
> > at http://www.cwdjr.info/wine/FAQ.php .
>
> Many thanks!
>
> I think that the font size and color scheme look fine, but I would
> suggest that the main entries in the Table of Contents should be left
> justified, not centered, and the subtopics could be indented by a tab
> stop or so. I like the overall organization as well as the use of
> links.

The page at http://www.cwdjr.info/wine/FAQ.php has been modified as you
suggested to see how it looks. These changes in style are quite easy to
make because they are done in the CSS style sheet at the top of the
page. Large sites often use an external style sheet that controls many
pages. Then changes made in this external CSS style sheet modifies the
style of even hundreds of pages on a site without having to change each
one.

> Perhaps when the main TOC entries are used in the body, we
> should lose the numbers that precede them? That's a judgement call IMO.

I have no strong feeling on this, one way or the other. However, I
suggest that we leave the numbers in until the page is more complete.
The reason is that the numbers help me find what needs to be modified
rapidly. It will then be easy to remove the numbers in the body at any
time if one wants to. However it would be much more work to remove them
and then have to put them back in.

> The page at http://www.cwdjr.info/wine/FAQ.php has been modified as you
> suggested to see how it looks.

Yes, excellent!

> What follows is a compendium of recommendations made in alt.food.wine over the past 5 years or so. Since they were made without knowledge of your tastes, they may or may not be useful to you. If you can define your tastes, you might get better advice asking the newsgroup after describing your tastes to us.

Since this is an answer to a question, it should be in the "answer" font, and not the "question" font.

What does the "go" button look like on a browser that has images disabled? I disabled them in Netscape and see "go button". Maybe it should say "go there" instead?

Jose
--
There are more ways to skin a cat than there are cats.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Jose wrote:
> > The page at http://www.cwdjr.info/wine/FAQ.php has been modified as you
> > suggested to see how it looks.
>
> Yes, excellent!
>
> > What follows is a compendium of recommendations made in alt.food.wine over the past 5 years or so. Since they were made without knowledge of your tastes, they may or may not be useful to you. If you can define your tastes, you might get better advice asking the newsgroup after describing your tastes to us.
>
> Since this is an answer to a question, it should be in the "answer" font, and not the "question" font.

Actually the above is not a question or an answer but a description of
what the sub-numbered items are about and how they came to be. Thus I
decided that using an italic text just as used in a description at the
very top of the page might be best. Of course I can make it any of the
used colors and text styles, or one of several million other colors if
that would look better.

> What does the "go" button look like on a browser that has images disabled? I disabled them in Netscape and see "go button". Maybe it should say "go there" instead?
>

What you are seeing when you disable images is the alt text that must
appear in all image tags to validate at the W3C. Alt text is supposed
to describe the image. Thus "go button" is a short description of the
image as required. The alt text is very important for some devices for
the blind. Thus "go button" is about as short as I can describe what
the image is. If the image were very important to see and not just a
click on tool, a very long alt might be indicated such as alt="large
black horse in a pasture eating grass". If I left off "button" , the
remaining "go" would not be very descriptive of the image. Notice that
when images are turned off the alt text is underlined and clickable
when it represents an image that was designed to be clickable, such as
the button used here. Thus the page still functions correctly without
the image.