Chrono Compendium
News and Updates => Site Updates => Topic started by: Ramsus on August 19, 2007, 08:50:42 pm
-
A while back it was determined that we should switch hosting providers (we're now happily hosted by WebFaction (http://www.webfaction.com/)), so I decided to throw in a few changes while I was at it. Some of you may have noticed the site down for half a day today, but other than that, everything should be back up and running.
Please mention any problems or concerns by commenting on this news item.
-
Well--and this was probably intended--the "That Creative Project" bit up in the box of links has no link attached to the phrase.
But otherwise I haven't seen any errors or bugs. It looks like it's set.
-
Well--and this was probably intended--the "That Creative Project" bit up in the box of links has no link attached to the phrase.
But otherwise I haven't seen any errors or bugs. It looks like it's set.
I forgot what Zeality decided to name it, and there's no page for it yet, so that's just a reminder.
-
Oh, okay.
Also, it seems the altered time settings have been reset...not a biggie, though, but just giving everyone a heads-up so they can realter them for themselves.
-
Dream Splash huh? I wonder what that is...
-
It looks excellent but I don't know if its me or everyone. The site loads up fast but it scrolls unbelievably slow O_o...Maybe it's just my computer...<_< Other then that issue it's awesome.
-
It looks excellent but I don't know if its me or everyone. The site loads up fast but it scrolls unbelievably slow O_o...Maybe it's just my computer...<_< Other then that issue it's awesome.
It's not just you. I'm having that same problem too. Though I don't knwo if it's because I'm using IE or not. And yeah, the new site design is impressive, but because of this little problem it made me think less of what it really is.
-
Ramsus says it's an IE problem, and he's working on it.
-
The solution to your problem guys?
Firefox (http://www.firefox.com)
EDIT: OMFG! I'm a Nu! Woohoo!
-
It looks excellent but I don't know if its me or everyone. The site loads up fast but it scrolls unbelievably slow O_o...Maybe it's just my computer...<_< Other then that issue it's awesome.
It's not just you. I'm having that same problem too. Though I don't knwo if it's because I'm using IE or not. And yeah, the new site design is impressive, but because of this little problem it made me think less of what it really is.
Problem fixed. Apparently IE's rendering engine chokes on tiling small images, so I just redid the pattern images to be bigger. Didn't make much of a difference in filesize (they were so small, it was mostly header data to begin with), but IE should scroll nice and fast now.
EDIT: If you visited earlier, you might want to clear your cache to make sure it takes effect.
-
I typically use IE, and it's working fine for me. Nice work on the redesign!
(http://www.chronotrigger.info/support/spreadsupp/wiipromo.gif) (http://www.chronotrigger.info)
-
It's still scrolling slowly but not NEARLY as bad as before. hell no i'm not using Firefox. That thing crashes on me constantly ;/
Edit: Woops give me a second to clear cache.
Edit 2: Still scrolling slowly O_o....Oh well. I can deal with this one. Other one was unbearble.
-
Problem fixed. Apparently IE's rendering engine chokes on tiling small images, so I just redid the pattern images to be bigger. Didn't make much of a difference in filesize (they were so small, it was mostly header data to begin with), but IE should scroll nice and fast now.
EDIT: If you visited earlier, you might want to clear your cache to make sure it takes effect.
Much better! Wow that was a really quick fix, I guess it was just a minor problem with the background images or something. Kudos on the new design, I have to say I was really impressed with it. Great job!
-
I'm not sure if there's more content on the sidebar below what we're seeing, but the page seems to terminate with the main body's content length while cutting off some of the sidebar:
http://www.chronocompendium.com/Stories/29
-
Looks like the forum attachments are missing. I've got a backup!
Edit: http://www.chronocompendium.com/Stories/43
Ah, features! They're like visual candy now. Everything syncs up in cold, lightly purple, gray, blue shades of placidity and temperance. And darkly shading the title / image / header boxes gives everything placement and order. This is my favorite color scheme ever!
-
I fucking love it. Fantastic work, guys.
-
I'm not sure if there's more content on the sidebar below what we're seeing, but the page seems to terminate with the main body's content length while cutting off some of the sidebar:
http://www.chronocompendium.com/Stories/29
I'll have to make an extreme test page with a superlong sidebar and a little bit of content to see about this... But I'll have to work on it later.
EDIT: I think I worked around it. E.g. http://www.chronocompendium.com/Stories/42/4
Let me know how it works on your computer.
-
Every so often, I'm told that I'm unable to connect to the server, is this a cache problem?
-
I get that same thing. Doesn't last too long but it is annoying.
-
I had that problem last night too. So annoying.
-
Sidebar works!
The Compendium's disappearing act is just an effect of the DNS changes propagating across the world.
-
Rasmus's MiniWikis are down.
-
I've got the CE one safely backed up.
-
Every so often, I'm told that I'm unable to connect to the server, is this a cache problem?
I get that same thing. Doesn't last too long but it is annoying.
I had that problem last night too. So annoying.
Let me join the bandwagon. What's going no with this?
It never last, but like others have said, sort of annoying.
-
There's no avatars to choose from. (http://www.chronocompendium.com/Forums/Smileys/default/icon_confused.gif)
-
I'll restore my backup soon.
-
Can't send attachments.
-
Rasmus's MiniWikis are down.
I ended up removing them.
-
Can't send attachments.
fixed
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
There's no avatars to choose from. (http://www.chronocompendium.com/Forums/Smileys/default/icon_confused.gif)
Also fixed.
-
Every so often, I'm told that I'm unable to connect to the server, is this a cache problem?
This one will have to wait a week or so, since it could just be DNS issues that are fixing themselves. If you're still having trouble next Saturday, then go ahead and post about it.
I can't notice that kind of problem, since I'm on such a bad connection that that's a normal thing for every website...
-
This new design is good... very good. That said, I still liked the old one better.
(An odd thing to say for my first post, but, I've been reading/lurking at the Compendium for a long time.)
-
Hmm... I think the site might be broken in IE6. I can't test that (yet), but if you have IE6, please post a screenshot here.
-
http://img399.imageshack.us/img399/3702/compendiumiepc2.png - That's what home page looks like on IE. The site isn't doing that error as of yet, but I'll get a screenshot of it IF IT comes again.
-
http://img399.imageshack.us/img399/3702/compendiumiepc2.png - That's what home page looks like on IE. The site isn't doing that error as of yet, but I'll get a screenshot of it IF IT comes again.
Thanks for taking the time, but you'll never see the error. I designed the site for IE7, as well as Firefox, and I tested it in Konqueror. It's IE6 that I'm worried about, since at least 1/4th of the site's visitors still use it. After that, I'll double check it in Safari.
Right now I'm actually downloading a Virtual PC image from Microsoft with IE6 on it (it's the only way to use IE6 on a Vista machine...), so I should be able to test it soon. It's just, they throw in an entire copy of Windows XP, so it's a fairly big download.
For the time being though, I'd just like to make sure that any IE6 users out there aren't silently suffering.
EDIT: BTW, is scrolling still pretty bad for you compared to other sites?
-
Sidebar gets stuffed at the bottom in IE6.
You can also see another problem with stuff on the left side getting cut off in the second screenshot. It happens when the window is too small. (It happens in Firefox too, maybe others.)
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
Thanks. That confirms my suspicions.
Also, the cut-off problem is something I knew about; it's known a side-effect of one of the CSS techniques I use. While I'm going to fix the site in IE6 ASAP, I'm not going to look into a work-around for the cut-off problem unless it's a real problem for someone (i.e. they're really stuck at a low-resolution and can't use the site), or based on the site demographics, as revealed by our statistics.
-
I found something interesting. Not so much broken, just weird.
When I was messing around with the links on the main page, I clicked the bottom of the page link that sent me to the mission statement. I clicked on the staff and the old site layout popped up.
It's not a big deal, but maybe you just forgot to change the layout for this portion of the site. I have no clue how this sort of thing work. I just figured it changed it all at once. Did you miss a part or something?
-
I ran across that earlier too. Like the old 404 page (missing.html), that page is hard-coded HTML, so it'd be a hassle to update. Sooner or later I'm going to make a more flexible replacement, so consider it deprecated (or a neat Easter Egg to take a look at the old layout).
Anyway, you guys are really helping me out here. Keep up the great work.
-
For some reason I can't access the site at all from my computer unless it's through a proxy site. Keeps giving me a "Server not Found" message.
[edit] I read the thread and found that others have this problem and it went away, but mine's been here since this morning :/
-
This new design is good... very good. That said, I still liked the old one better.
(An odd thing to say for my first post, but, I've been reading/lurking at the Compendium for a long time.)
I sort of feel the same, as I really liked the old layout. Nonetheless I appreciate the time and effort put into something new for a change.
-
Whoo, people are going to view our about page now. I've got an impressive list of Compendium history and projects there that would otherwise go unnoticed.
That's neat concerning those staff pages. I still love my watery, azure (in the blue green sense, though I mostly use the blue purple sense of the word) color scheme, with the perfect cut-out Rock Lee and the Rufus Shinra which can be used anywhere. Now that I'm a Bleach fan, Urahara is cool.
-
I noticed that the Current Events section is appearing at the bottom of the main page for me. Does it do that for anyone else?
I like the color scheme as well, although I am typically a bit partial to green.
-
I noticed that the Current Events section is appearing at the bottom of the main page for me. Does it do that for anyone else?
I like the color scheme as well, although I am typically a bit partial to green.
It's now a confirmed problem with IE6. Once I get a virtual machine set up where I can test with that browser, I'll have it fixed within a few days. If you want though, you can try updating to IE7.
-
I like the color scheme as well, although I am typically a bit partial to green.
Me too. green is my favorite color so that is only natural, right?
I do like baby blue too though. I loved the old top banner as well.
No offenses to whoever made the new one(it's good), but I loved the old one soo much better.
-
There, the layout is fixed in IE6.
-
How's the main site's text look to everyone now? I think the spaces are a little too large; content seems bloated. I wouldn't totally restore it the way it was, but I might cut the space between lines by a third.
-
How's the main site's text look to everyone now? I think the spaces are a little too large; content seems bloated. I wouldn't totally restore it the way it was, but I might cut the space between lines by a third.
A little tighter with the words would be fine. It does seem a little bloated as you say.
I use FireFox if that matter at all.
-
I don't know if this is a problem for everyone else, or just for whoever is using IE....
But whenever I open a link in a new window for some reason the site isn't displayed in its center and is alligned to the left side of the screen.
I'm not so sure that this is a real issue with the site's design or not, but it is kind of annoying.
-
I don't know if this is a problem for everyone else, or just for whoever is using IE....
But whenever I open a link in a new window for some reason the site isn't displayed in its center and is alligned to the left side of the screen.
I'm not so sure that this is a real issue with the site's design or not, but it is kind of annoying.
That's just what happens when the site is loaded in a window less than 1000 pixels wide. The solution is to maximize the new window and hit refresh. Later I'll fix it to recenter when you make the window bigger...
-
How's the main site's text look to everyone now? I think the spaces are a little too large; content seems bloated. I wouldn't totally restore it the way it was, but I might cut the space between lines by a third.
A little tighter with the words would be fine. It does seem a little bloated as you say.
I use FireFox if that matter at all.
Right now it's closer to 1.6-1.8 times line spacing at the most, which isn't all that excessive. If the content seems bloated, maybe that's because the content really is bloated.
If you want to really help me, pay less attention to how different it looks and how long everything looks now, and more to how easily you can read over each line, or scan text for specific sentences. That would be the most useful feedback.
-
ZeaLitY wanted me to chime in on this. I think it looks fine for short blocks of text, but he's got a point with the longer stuff:
http://www.chronocompendium.com/Stories/42/43
Rather than arguing, rein the line spacing in a little bit and we'll all be happier.
Oh, and get rid of those god dammed diagonal lines in the background. Pretty please!
-
ZeaLitY wanted me to chime in on this. I think it looks fine for short blocks of text, but he's got a point with the longer stuff:
http://www.chronocompendium.com/Stories/42/43
Rather than arguing, rein the line spacing in a little bit and we'll all be happier.
Oh, and get rid of those god dammed diagonal lines in the background. Pretty please!
I know he has a point. Aesthetically the large blocks of text look prettier with closer lines in this layout (I think so too), but the extra spacing helps you read them, and that's more important.
However, those paragraphs under "Scene #C" seem rather extreme examples:
Paragraph 1: 218 words
Paragraph 2: 276 words
Paragraph 3: 232 words
Most of the paragraphs in novels and books and on the Internet are easily between 70-150 words in length.
What do you think the real problem here is? If I promote longer and longer paragraphs through the styles, while at the same time making those same behemoths of paragraphs less easier to read, then am I really doing the site a service? What do you think the natural tendency will be when writing new content?
Don't trust me? View the page without styles, or view it in a text-only browser. Then tell me what the problem is.
I will not compromise on this point unless you can prove to me that the longer paragraphs are somehow beneficial to making the content more accessible. Besides, I'm still working on readjusting the spacing around the paragraphs, which might be making the line-spacing look worse than it is even with the shorter paragraphs. Also, when I made the edit, it was with the full-page width in mind. I've since edited in more specific styles for the pages with other widths due to having content on the right.
Also, I'll eventually fix the stripes somehow, but first I need some time to sit down and experiment with some alternative ideas. Considering how little time I have to do anything creative or conscientiously work on anything these days, it doesn't help to whine about anything until Saturday morning.
EDIT: Attached that same page converted to a text file rendered to be read on a standard terminal screen, and you can see that the paragraphs mentioned are easily more than an entire screen's length. Many other texts (novels, books, articles, and regular Internet content) look just fine under the same exact conditions.
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
How's the main site's text look to everyone now? I think the spaces are a little too large; content seems bloated. I wouldn't totally restore it the way it was, but I might cut the space between lines by a third.
A little tighter with the words would be fine. It does seem a little bloated as you say.
I use FireFox if that matter at all.
Right now it's closer to 1.6-1.8 times line spacing at the most, which isn't all that excessive. If the content seems bloated, maybe that's because the content really is bloated.
If you want to really help me, pay less attention to how different it looks and how long everything looks now, and more to how easily you can read over each line, or scan text for specific sentences. That would be the most useful feedback.
I was just answering Zeality's question. It is a little too wide, not by very much. That's all I was saying.
-
I was just answering Zeality's question. It is a little too wide, not by very much. That's all I was saying.
I was just addressing both of you.
-
Long paragraphs are bad for the site? Why, because they reduce readership? It sounds to me like you've declared the Compendium an official Lowest Common Denominator fan club.
Be that as it may, I don't actually care enough about your spacing scheme to press the argument. Z asked for my opinion here, and there you have it.
What I really care about is those friggin' diagonal lines. The sooner they're gone, the sooner I can go back up to Defcon 3.
-
Right now it's closer to 1.6-1.8 times line spacing at the most, which isn't all that excessive. If the content seems bloated, maybe that's because the content really is bloated.
If you want to really help me, pay less attention to how different it looks and how long everything looks now, and more to how easily you can read over each line, or scan text for specific sentences. That would be the most useful feedback.
Maybe you should make the spacing between paragraphs something between 1.4-1.6 times the normal one.
Just a suggestion, seeing as how everyone seems to agree that the spacing is a little too much as it is right now.
I think that should probably look just about right with either long or short paragraphs.
Anyway, I was wandering what happened with the main server site. I get a message that there is an Internal Server Error everytime I try to access the news/updates page.
-
Right now it's closer to 1.6-1.8 times line spacing at the most, which isn't all that excessive. If the content seems bloated, maybe that's because the content really is bloated.
If you want to really help me, pay less attention to how different it looks and how long everything looks now, and more to how easily you can read over each line, or scan text for specific sentences. That would be the most useful feedback.
Maybe you should make the spacing between paragraphs something between 1.4-1.6 times the normal one.
Just a suggestion, seeing as how everyone seems to agree that the spacing is a little too much as it is right now.
I think that should probably look just about right with either long or short paragraphs.
Anyway, I was wandering what happened with the main server site. I get a message that there is an Internal Server Error everytime I try to access the news/updates page.
I shouldn't even throw numbers out there... The numbers I wrote are the ratios of the line height to the font size, not the normal line height. Normal line height/spacing is already at least 1.2 times, and the current line spacing is only 120% bigger than the normal line spacing in most areas of the site. Considering Verdana has really large x-height at small sizes (the lower-case letters aren't much shorter than the upper-case ones), it needs slightly more than normal line height -- even more so as the text becomes wider.
Besides, what would make that look "just about right"? You personal taste? That some other people brought up something about the line spacing that's since been changed before you even posted?
You should always double-guess your own impressions about these things. Looking at blocks of text to judge their aesthetic value is one thing, but try actually reading the text for long periods of time.
And I don't design by committee. Never ever suggest anything because it seems like everyone agrees. Bring your own evidence.
Also, I was working on something and it just screwed up some permissions. Things are fine now.
Long paragraphs are bad for the site? Why, because they reduce readership? It sounds to me like you've declared the Compendium an official Lowest Common Denominator fan club.
Be that as it may, I don't actually care enough about your spacing scheme to press the argument. Z asked for my opinion here, and there you have it.
What I really care about is those friggin' diagonal lines. The sooner they're gone, the sooner I can go back up to Defcon 3.
If you're writing huge paragraphs, it means you're talking at too concrete a level and need to build even higher abstractions, or you're really just cramming together two or even three separate paragraphs. I don't see how forcing more concise, abstract language makes us "lowest common denominator."
-
Not everything can be pithy, and not everything that can be pithy should be. You're making a design specification based on a value judgment. As the site designer, you should stick to functionality and usability issues, and steer clear of deciding for others whether to use two words or two pages. You're so hands-off most of the time, and that has always been to the Compendium's benefit. It makes no sense to single out this one issue, especially when you're not even right.
-
I think the text has changed considerably now.
-
Not everything can be pithy, and not everything that can be pithy should be. You're making a design specification based on a value judgment. As the site designer, you should stick to functionality and usability issues, and steer clear of deciding for others whether to use two words or two pages. You're so hands-off most of the time, and that has always been to the Compendium's benefit. It makes no sense to single out this one issue, especially when you're not even right.
I expanded on that aspect because you singled out long paragraphs by using them as a prime example against my decision, not because of some some super-important value on which I based my entire judgment.
There's a lot of more important reasons I chose to increase the line height on the site that were very much rooted in functional/usability aspects, namely the readability of the text. Certainly, it makes the large paragraphs more perceptually unapproachable for the timid, but compared to having large paragraphs that look pretty but take significantly more energy to read, I felt it was a better trade-off.
To those reading but who really aren't, because you're just that way (I know you aren't Josh, but someone will inevitably use this as an opportunity to butt in, so I want to take this opportunity to stop them):
Just because closely-spaced, large blocks of text look pretty when you're PRETENDING TO READ them, IN REALITY they are HARDER TO READ.
Do NOT try discussing this from a "I think it looks" or "Everyone else thinks" perspective, because GROUPTHINK does NOT ALLOW people to THINK PAST their SHALLOW ANIMAL PERCEPTIONS.
If you don't have RESEARCH or YEARS OF REAL EXPERIENCE as EVIDENCE then please don't try to give your two cents.
But back to our discussion:
If you want to use exceptionally large paragraphs as an example of why I should give up readability for making the site prettier though, then why shouldn't I also try to dismiss the perception that such paragraphs are normal? Right or wrong, ample whitespace is important for readability, and these paragraphs don't provide that. Just because I can hide their size doesn't mean I should, especially when the trade-off is functional/usable.
Hell, I even tried to hide it as much as I could. That's part of the reason why I chose to use a small font to begin with, otherwise people start feeling those paragraphs are "too big" again. But screw it. They should look as big on this site as they would on any other site or on any other media.
Anyway, my biggest concern is that people seem to want to use this issue as a means to influence a decision that shouldn't even be open to discussion. The next thing you know, just because any Joe nobody with eyes can pick out some aspect of the layout and argue about it, he'll run with it and then feel big that he's leaving his mark. It'd be just like choosing the color of the bikeshed.
That's why all this arguing is bad, even though it won't make a difference. The content will be how you, Zeality, and the others write it, and the layout will be as I design it, and that's the end of that.
-
To those reading but who really aren't, because you're just that way (I know you aren't Josh, but someone will inevitably use this as an opportunity to butt in, so I want to take this opportunity to stop them):
Just because closely-spaced, large blocks of text look pretty when you're PRETENDING TO READ them, IN REALITY they are HARDER TO READ.
Do NOT try discussing this from a "I think it looks" or "Everyone else thinks" perspective, because GROUPTHINK does NOT ALLOW people to THINK PAST their SHALLOW ANIMAL PERCEPTIONS.
If you don't have RESEARCH or YEARS OF REAL EXPERIENCE as EVIDENCE then please don't try to give your two cents.
You're welcome. It was just a suggestion, which you apparently took a little too seriously.
I think the text has changed considerably now.
Yeah, I agree. Everything looks much better now.
-
To those reading but who really aren't, because you're just that way (I know you aren't Josh, but someone will inevitably use this as an opportunity to butt in, so I want to take this opportunity to stop them):
Just because closely-spaced, large blocks of text look pretty when you're PRETENDING TO READ them, IN REALITY they are HARDER TO READ.
Do NOT try discussing this from a "I think it looks" or "Everyone else thinks" perspective, because GROUPTHINK does NOT ALLOW people to THINK PAST their SHALLOW ANIMAL PERCEPTIONS.
If you don't have RESEARCH or YEARS OF REAL EXPERIENCE as EVIDENCE then please don't try to give your two cents.
You're welcome. It was just a suggestion, which you apparently took a little too seriously.
There is no "too serious" when it comes to these things, and I don't mean to make it seem like I'm singling you out, because it's not the posts that have already been made that I threw that in there for. Rather, I have to kill the this before I suddenly start getting "suggestions" from 20 different people about different things, which generates a lot of noise and wastes time (not just mine, but everyone's) on minor issues that I've usually already made a decision on.
-
Well, I certainly don't want to bring the mob down on you. Your explanation is satisfactory, if not necessarily satisfying. And like I said before, I don't care enough to want to pursue the matter.
-
I don't know what you recently changed, but the Chrono Compendium won't load in Firefox for me anymore - I'm posting from IE. When I try to load in Firefox, it says "Site not configured" in plain black text aligned to the top left corner on a white background.
-
I don't know what you recently changed, but the Chrono Compendium won't load in Firefox for me anymore - I'm posting from IE. When I try to load in Firefox, it says "Site not configured" in plain black text aligned to the top left corner on a white background.
Clear your firefox cache.