This is a discussion on "Minimalist" within the Entry, Nominations and Voting section. This forum, and the thread "Minimalist are both part of the Website of the Month Competition category.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
||
Minimalist
|
||
| Notices |
 |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools |
Apr 12th, 2004, 10:02
|
|||
|
|||
|
Minimalist
A minimalist and ascetic site. I know it looks clean and neat, but its not mine [xx(] and I don't even know him/her.
and we should applaud such a person for complying with web design standards. so i must post this. and I hope you seriously consider this site much as it is simplistic, it is 'programatically insane', as sirkent once said, to ensure max. compatibility and correct CSS/XHTML rendering. According to the site, at the about page, (http://www.exidge.com/aqua/index.php?c=about) "About the site This site is build and coded with 100% standards compliant XHTML1.0 and CSS2.0. As most of the formatting are done with CSS, the result is a small file sized, fast-loading site. I have also taken the effort to optimize all images to the lowest file sizes possible without impairing visual quality by using the appropriate compression formats and settings." One nice blog! |
|
|
|
Apr 12th, 2004, 10:15
|
|||
|
|||
|
Given the current x-browser support for CSS2 and the fact that is served as 'text/html', there is no surfer-perceivable benefit as a result of using these standards as yet. As for the accessibility... I'll leave that for another post.
|
|
Apr 12th, 2004, 10:19
|
|||
|
|||
|
doesn't validate to XHTML1.0 either
|
|
Apr 12th, 2004, 11:49
|
|||
|
|||
|
I'm sure it would be damn simple to get a site with such a simple layout to validate. The problem comes with more complicated designs for pages that have less information.
|
|
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
