Re: Visual problems on the front page

[Alexander Rødseth <alexanro@pvv.org>]

Hi again,


Jutta Wrage wrote:
> > Here's a page a just made about rounded corners, which includes a 
> > screenshot of how jagged the corners look at my computer:
> > http://www.pvv.org/~alexanro/rounded.html
>
> 1. Tables are for tabular data! Use semantic markup!
Agreed. My point was never that my suggestion of how to do things was 
correct, only that your way of doing things was ugly.

> 2. We have had such corners in a table layout, which took a lot of 
> hours unpaid work to be removed.
I'm sure it did and I'm sure adding non-jagged corners would take a 
similar amount of work.

> 3. your example goes totally jagged with large font setting.
The page I wrote, suck. That doesn't justify ignoring large parts of 
what I actually wrote. Besides, if you take a look at the "pros" and 
"cons" on the page, you'll see that I was aware of that from the start.

> You critizism is about a bit out of the way as nobody is payed her for 
> several hundreds of hours a year.
I strongly disagree that critizism shouldn't be allowed if it's 
voluntary work. There's a very thin line between "bugreport" and 
"critizism that's a bit out of the way".


> I personally am convinced that having page working for _everyone_ is 
> much more importand than image corners with invalid HTML.
So, you're saying it is impossible to combine good webdesign with a page 
that works for everyone?


> And no. if they would look that ugly you try to make us believe, 
> someone would have noted out that a year ago already.
I come here and critizise your hard work. Of course you become angry. 
Who wouldn't? This is the reason someone haven't noted you a year ago 
already.


> > > Not an option, if you want to display the navbar well with 
> > > font-sizes from very small up to extremely large.
> > > For larger text boxes images are an option, for small ones like the 
> > > blue ones in the navbar, not.
> > Why isn't it an option?
>
> Because the pages are for _everyone_ and have not to be broken for 
> people with bad eyes.
> If you do not understand, why breaking accessibility is not an option, 
> I cannot do anything by that.
>
> We have to care that 22,000 page work with the layout. That needs 
> several hundred vountary work a year. So it might be enough for you: 
> we will have another solution for the corners, if ther is one, which 
> is really an option without breaking accessibility.
Very well. I give up on the rounded corners. You still have a long way 
to go on those <hr>-lines, font and color-choices, though.


I wish you all continued luck with the web page, despite any hard 
feelings you might have for my critizism.


Best regards,
  Alexander Rødseth