That controversial rock/metal style site is finally complete and holding 
Google Ads.
www.crackguitar.com/

The backup noscript navigation is temporarily hidden for search indexing 
purposes.

-dE|_---

On Mon, 2 Feb 2009 18:48:21 -0000, "dE|_"
 wrote:

>That controversial rock/metal style site is finally complete and holding 
>Google Ads.
>www.crackguitar.com/
>
>The backup noscript navigation is temporarily hidden for search indexing 
>purposes.

I like that.  You just need some decent music now! ;-)


-- 
Regards, Paul Herber, Sandrila Ltd.  http://www.sandrila.co.uk/

"dE|_"  wrote in message 
news:VdHhl.1960$jz5.588@newsfe09.ams2...
: That controversial rock/metal style site is finally complete and 
holding
: Google Ads.
: www.crackguitar.com/
:
: The backup noscript navigation is temporarily hidden for search 
indexing
: purposes.
:

Try turning off images, and then try to navigate (that is, not 
invoking the noscript navigation), the main menu 'button' need alt 
tags if nothing else on the page heading! :~)

<no flame intended>
-- 
Wikipedia: the Internet equivalent of
Hyde Park and 'speakers corner'...
Sorry, mail to this address goes unread.
Please reply via group.

"Jerry" <mapson.scarts@btinternet.com.INVALID> wrote in message 
news:gm7o23$107$1@news.motzarella.org...
>
> "dE|_"  wrote in message
> news:VdHhl.1960$jz5.588@newsfe09.ams2...
> : That controversial rock/metal style site is finally complete and
> holding
> : Google Ads.
> : www.crackguitar.com/
> :
> : The backup noscript navigation is temporarily hidden for search
> indexing
> : purposes.
> :
>
> Try turning off images, and then try to navigate (that is, not
> invoking the noscript navigation), the main menu 'button' need alt
> tags if nothing else on the page heading! :~)

eh?

I'm off out for the night now, so why not wait until the alternative nav 
version goes up tomorrow, have another look and run that past me again.

-dE|_---

<uk.net.web.authoring>
<dE|_>
<Mon, 2 Feb 2009 18:48:21 -0000>
<VdHhl.1960$jz5.588@newsfe09.ams2>

> That controversial rock/metal style site is finally complete and holding 
> Google Ads.
> www.crackguitar.com/
> 

Try using a light coloured background as it would probably look better .

Its just a matter of finding a suitable background colour that goes with 
(and blends in) with your white text layout boxes .


-- 
www.cannabiswindow.co.uk/guestbook_latest_entrys.php

"dE|_"  wrote in message 
news:xYJhl.7560$q85.3067@newsfe13.ams2...
:
: "Jerry" <mapson.scarts@btinternet.com.INVALID> wrote in message
: news:gm7o23$107$1@news.motzarella.org...
: >
: > "dE|_"  wrote in message
: > news:VdHhl.1960$jz5.588@newsfe09.ams2...
: > : That controversial rock/metal style site is finally complete and
: > holding
: > : Google Ads.
: > : www.crackguitar.com/
: > :
: > : The backup noscript navigation is temporarily hidden for search
: > indexing
: > : purposes.
: > :
: >
: > Try turning off images, and then try to navigate (that is, not
: > invoking the noscript navigation), the main menu 'button' need alt
: > tags if nothing else on the page heading! :~)
:
: eh?
:
: I'm off out for the night now, so why not wait until the alternative 
nav
: version goes up tomorrow, have another look and run that past me 
again.
:

Apologies. On a second look - to get a screen grab [1] - you do have 
alt tags but they can't be seen with the default background (black), 
ignoring your background CSS allows them to be seen. The main problem 
is that your navigation image (navplate.jpg) has a white background 
that allows your 'black' text to show up, but the background to the 
navigation area has been left the default page background of black, 
thus if your image (navplate.jpg) fails or is disabled you are 
displaying 'black' or dark blue text on a black background! Does that 
'explanation' makes any sense?

[1] I would send you a screen grab but can't see any means to do so
-- 
Regards, Jerry.
Location - United Kingdom.
In the first instance please reply to group, sorry,
Emails to the reply-to address are deleted unread.

"Jerry" <mapson.scarts@btinternet.com.INVALID> wrote in message 
news:gm7tjp$tp$1@news.motzarella.org...
>
> "dE|_"  wrote in message
> news:xYJhl.7560$q85.3067@newsfe13.ams2...
> :
> : "Jerry" <mapson.scarts@btinternet.com.INVALID> wrote in message
> : news:gm7o23$107$1@news.motzarella.org...
> : >
> : > "dE|_"  wrote in message
> : > news:VdHhl.1960$jz5.588@newsfe09.ams2...
> : > : That controversial rock/metal style site is finally complete and
> : > holding
> : > : Google Ads.
> : > : www.crackguitar.com/
> : > :
> : > : The backup noscript navigation is temporarily hidden for search
> : > indexing
> : > : purposes.
> : > :
> : >
> : > Try turning off images, and then try to navigate (that is, not
> : > invoking the noscript navigation), the main menu 'button' need alt
> : > tags if nothing else on the page heading! :~)
> :
> : eh?
> :
> : I'm off out for the night now, so why not wait until the alternative
> nav
> : version goes up tomorrow, have another look and run that past me
> again.
> :
>
> Apologies. On a second look - to get a screen grab [1] - you do have
> alt tags but they can't be seen with the default background (black),
> ignoring your background CSS allows them to be seen. The main problem
> is that your navigation image (navplate.jpg) has a white background
> that allows your 'black' text to show up, but the background to the
> navigation area has been left the default page background of black,
> thus if your image (navplate.jpg) fails or is disabled you are
> displaying 'black' or dark blue text on a black background! Does that
> 'explanation' makes any sense?

(back from the pub so I'll keep it short)

So what you mean is I forgot to put a white color behind the white image. 
Thank you.

What developer toolbar do you use? I tried disabling images on both of mine 
IE/FF earlier to see what you meant but nothing buggered off.

-dE|_---

"dE|_"  wrote in message 
news:QuNhl.1$Cr4.0@newsfe26.ams2...
:
: "Jerry" <mapson.scarts@btinternet.com.INVALID> wrote in message
: news:gm7tjp$tp$1@news.motzarella.org...
: >
: > "dE|_"  wrote in message
: > news:xYJhl.7560$q85.3067@newsfe13.ams2...
: > :
: > : "Jerry" <mapson.scarts@btinternet.com.INVALID> wrote in message
: > : news:gm7o23$107$1@news.motzarella.org...
: > : >
: > : > "dE|_"  wrote in message
: > : > news:VdHhl.1960$jz5.588@newsfe09.ams2...
: > : > : That controversial rock/metal style site is finally complete 
and
: > : > holding
: > : > : Google Ads.
: > : > : www.crackguitar.com/
: > : > :
: > : > : The backup noscript navigation is temporarily hidden for 
search
: > : > indexing
: > : > : purposes.
: > : > :
: > : >
: > : > Try turning off images, and then try to navigate (that is, not
: > : > invoking the noscript navigation), the main menu 'button' need 
alt
: > : > tags if nothing else on the page heading! :~)
: > :
: > : eh?
: > :
: > : I'm off out for the night now, so why not wait until the 
alternative
: > nav
: > : version goes up tomorrow, have another look and run that past me
: > again.
: > :
: >
: > Apologies. On a second look - to get a screen grab [1] - you do 
have
: > alt tags but they can't be seen with the default background 
(black),
: > ignoring your background CSS allows them to be seen. The main 
problem
: > is that your navigation image (navplate.jpg) has a white 
background
: > that allows your 'black' text to show up, but the background to 
the
: > navigation area has been left the default page background of 
black,
: > thus if your image (navplate.jpg) fails or is disabled you are
: > displaying 'black' or dark blue text on a black background! Does 
that
: > 'explanation' makes any sense?
:
: (back from the pub so I'll keep it short)
:
: So what you mean is I forgot to put a white color behind the white 
image.
: Thank you.

Yes, that's the short answer, it was getting late - wood, trees and 
all that, sorry!

:
: What developer toolbar do you use? I tried disabling images on both 
of mine
: IE/FF earlier to see what you meant but nothing buggered off.
:

I simply disable images (but allowed image place holders) from within 
IE's control panel (options) and refreshed the page, I do much the 
same with FF etc. - for what I need to do I've never found the need 
for any 'developers plug-ins'!
-- 
Wikipedia: the Internet equivalent of
Hyde Park and 'speakers corner'...
Sorry, mail to this address goes unread.
Please reply via group.

"Jerry" <mapson.scarts@btinternet.com.INVALID> wrote;
---snip---

> : > : > Try turning off images, and then try to navigate (that is, not
> : > : > invoking the noscript navigation), the main menu 'button' need
> alt
> : > : > tags if nothing else on the page heading! :~)
> : > :
> : > : eh?
> : > :
> : > : I'm off out for the night now, so why not wait until the
> alternative
> : > nav
> : > : version goes up tomorrow, have another look and run that past me
> : > again.
> : > :
> : >
> : > Apologies. On a second look - to get a screen grab [1] - you do
> have
> : > alt tags but they can't be seen with the default background
> (black),
> : > ignoring your background CSS allows them to be seen. The main
> problem
> : > is that your navigation image (navplate.jpg) has a white
> background
> : > that allows your 'black' text to show up, but the background to
> the
> : > navigation area has been left the default page background of
> black,
> : > thus if your image (navplate.jpg) fails or is disabled you are
> : > displaying 'black' or dark blue text on a black background! Does
> that
> : > 'explanation' makes any sense?
> :
> : (back from the pub so I'll keep it short)
> :
> : So what you mean is I forgot to put a white color behind the white
> image.
> : Thank you.
>
> Yes, that's the short answer, it was getting late - wood, trees and
> all that, sorry!
>
> :
> : What developer toolbar do you use? I tried disabling images on both
> of mine
> : IE/FF earlier to see what you meant but nothing buggered off.
> :
>
> I simply disable images (but allowed image place holders) from within
> IE's control panel (options) and refreshed the page, I do much the
> same with FF etc. - for what I need to do I've never found the need
> for any 'developers plug-ins'!

I see where I was getting confused about you reference to alts in the nav 
panel; There are no alts in there because the text links themself in the JS 
menu are black text, not a row of images, quote; 'button'.

-dE|_---

"dE|_"  wrote in message 
news:VdHhl.1960$jz5.588@newsfe09.ams2...
> That controversial rock/metal style site is finally complete and holding 
> Google Ads.
> www.crackguitar.com/
>
> The backup noscript navigation is temporarily hidden for search indexing 
> purposes.
>
> -dE|_--- 
>
>

You best take a look at it in Chrome. The menu system goes a bit wrong.

AC

Message-ID: <VdHhl.1960$jz5.588@newsfe09.ams2> from dE|_ contained the
following:

>
>The backup noscript navigation is temporarily hidden for search indexing 
>purposes.

"# If the guitar has a whammy bar; are all the 3 springs in the back?"

Isn't 'tremolo arm' more widely used in this country?  And not all have
springs in the back (Bigsby for example).

Course, it may have more than three springs also, with heavier strings.
-- 
Geoff Berrow  0110001001101100010000000110
001101101011011001000110111101100111001011
100110001101101111001011100111010101101011
http://slipperyhill.co.uk - http://4theweb.co.uk

"AC"  wrote...
>
>> That controversial rock/metal style site is finally complete and holding 
>> Google Ads.
>> www.crackguitar.com/
>>
>> The backup noscript navigation is temporarily hidden for search indexing 
>> purposes.
>
> You best take a look at it in Chrome. The menu system goes a bit wrong.
>

I noticed that months ago. Chrome is the only browser that isn't holding it 
correctly so I'm assumahoping that they've just got some script issues to 
fix.

I am at this very moment fine tuning other points, forgive some ignorance 
here, but I don't give a toss about Chrome.

-dE|_---

"Geoff Berrow" say:
>
>>
>>The backup noscript navigation is temporarily hidden for search indexing
>>purposes.
>
> "# If the guitar has a whammy bar; are all the 3 springs in the back?"
>
> Isn't 'tremolo arm' more widely used in this country?  And not all have
> springs in the back (Bigsby for example).
>
> Course, it may have more than three springs also, with heavier strings.

True; Mustangs don't use springs either, I could add an extra point that not 
all whammy-bar/tremolo-arm mechanics use springs, or just leave the trader 
to tell them if theirs doesn't.

As for wham/trem; I don't rate either to be the British translation as such, 
but I could put an a.k.a. in there. Stats say visits 75% USA.

-dE|_---

"dE|_"  wrote in message 
news:ii_hl.27$9u6.1@newsfe27.ams2...
>
> "AC"  wrote...
>>
>>> That controversial rock/metal style site is finally complete and holding 
>>> Google Ads.
>>> www.crackguitar.com/
>>>
>>> The backup noscript navigation is temporarily hidden for search indexing 
>>> purposes.
>>
>> You best take a look at it in Chrome. The menu system goes a bit wrong.
>>
>
> I noticed that months ago. Chrome is the only browser that isn't holding 
> it correctly so I'm assumahoping that they've just got some script issues 
> to fix.
>
> I am at this very moment fine tuning other points, forgive some ignorance 
> here, but I don't give a toss about Chrome.
>
> -dE|_--- 
>
>

Sorry, I thought you were serious about your work. My mistake.

AC

"AC"  wrote in message 
news:9U_hl.18410$E93.355@newsfe11.ams2...
:
<snip
:
: Sorry, I thought you were serious about your work. My mistake.
:

That's what people are saying to Google about Chrome!...
-- 
Wikipedia: the Internet equivalent of
Hyde Park and 'speakers corner'...
Sorry, mail to this address goes unread.
Please reply via group.

"AC" say after...
>
>>>
>>> You best take a look at it in Chrome. The menu system goes a bit wrong.
>>>
>>
>> I noticed that months ago. Chrome is the only browser that isn't holding 
>> it correctly so I'm assumahoping that they've just got some script issues 
>> to fix.
>>
>> I am at this very moment fine tuning other points, forgive some ignorance 
>> here, but I don't give a toss about Chrome.
>>
>
> Sorry, I thought you were serious about your work. My mistake.
>

I got the latest update of the drop menu software and it's all good now. 
They've found their way into and around Chrome's buggery.

It was totally bizarre what was going on before; The /next/ droplist along 
appearing at the top left of the page as you roll over one. Once over all of 
them, no more of it. ?

-dE|_---

"dE|_" wrote about...
> That controversial rock/metal style site is finally complete and holding 
> Google Ads.
> www.crackguitar.com/

And whilst fiddling with robot meta data, looking at search references on my 
server stats, I discovered that this site is currently Yahoo #1 result for 
"main crack stage"

:-)

-dE|_---

On Mon, 2 Feb 2009 18:48:21 -0000, "dE|_"
 wrote:

>That controversial rock/metal style site is finally complete and holding 
>Google Ads.
>www.crackguitar.com/

Why is it that so few websites seem to graciously 'reflow' with a
change of browser window size these days?  I'm sure I remember in the
olden days that text and graphics "reflowed" so no matter what size
your browser window was (within sensible limits) , each page was
more-or-less useable.   

These days so much seems to be in a  layout  fixed by the author,
paying no attention to what the user might require.  Is this a triumph
of style over substance?   Or am I 

a) missing something?
b) a Luddite?
c) using a mis-configured browser (firefox)?

Lewis

me here wrote:

> Why is it that so few websites seem to graciously 'reflow' with a
> change of browser window size these days?

That imposes design restrictions that not everyone is willing to 
implement.  There are compromises to be made between presentation and 
handling any sized browser window.

-- 
Tony Evans
Saving trees and wasting electrons since 1993
blog -> http://perceptionistruth.com/
olmr -> http://www.onelinemoviereviews.co.uk/
[ anything below this line wasn't written by me ]

"me here" wrote:
>
>>That controversial rock/metal style site is finally complete and holding
>>Google Ads.
>>www.crackguitar.com/
>
> Why is it that so few websites seem to graciously 'reflow' with a
> change of browser window size these days?  I'm sure I remember in the
> olden days that text and graphics "reflowed" so no matter what size
> your browser window was (within sensible limits) , each page was
> more-or-less useable.

Here's a little stretchy one of mine;
http://www.chromecatmedia.co.uk/home.html

If the backgrounds are plain or shapings are square then it's manageable. 
But if it starts causing cross-browser issues or relying on min-width 
max-width which fails in IE6 then it's just not worth it.

-dE|_---