Web Site Discussion and Requests

chequita guevara · January 1, 2003, 18:05

At the request of Mark, so the old thread can drop.

Which design
Currently we have the two design proposals in the poll thread. If you haven't voted on a design yet, please do so. I'd like to get started building.

Dynamic web site?
I've talked to DanQ about getting access to the db and PHP server, so that we can have a dynamic website. This would keep the number of pages to a minimum, allowing us to use a few templates and keep our content seperately. It will make it much easier to make changes across the board, rather than is the case now, doing it page by page. However, it will necessitate PHP and db programming, neither of which I can do, at least now. I'm fully prepared to learn both, however, or we can draft someone else to do that.

Other issues:
HTML 4+ or XHTML?
I suggest using the later since it is XML compatable and standards compliant. Modern browsers will have an easier time with XHTML.

CSS and layers or tables and frames?
I'd rather not use frames at all if it can be helped. They slow the loading of pages considerably. I'd like to use tables as little as possible, and only for presenting tabular data, but that may not be possible, depending on the design we use. CSS is a necessity, but combined with layers it's a very powerful tool for layout, not to mention design.

compatable with old Netscape or fully standards compliant?
I think we should ignore everything before Netscape 6 and IE 5. Netscape 4.+ is more than five years old now. Upgrade already.

Site images: high quality or free?
The images I've used in both comps are high-quality images. They look good and make the site look professional. I will not be part of stealing art for the site, as it not only risks the project, but would also put Apolyton itself at risk (using them in the comps is allowable by the terms of the site from which I pulled them). The alternatives are to scour the net for free images, which are generally quite poor in quality or have an illustrator create new images for us.

(The images I used were actually rights-managed images, which are prohibitively expensive, unless someone's willing to shell out $1,700+ an image.)

[edit by Mark, link to poll thread so it doesn't also have to remain on top of the forum]

LDiCesare · January 1, 2003, 18:19

I already voted so I won't comment the design here.

Definitely don't use frames. I don't like CSS either, but that's OK for me. I don't know what layers are, but if I don't need to do something like enabling/disabling htem, it's OK to use that.
Old netscape: Maybe redirect old browsers towards the old web saying it is not up to date, but there may still be interesting links there? Also beware some people on Apolyton use Opera. I don't know what Opera supports, but if you test for the browser in the pages, it's better not to kick them out if they can read the pages.

Images: Well, presented the way you do, we have little choice. How many images would you need/wnat, and what kind? We can probably get a few from scenario designs, like reproductions of paintings or mosaics, which should be quality and free, considering the author of the mosaic is usually dead since a few centuries. I think a portrait of Alexander, and I must have a mosaic of Basil II of Constantinople somewhere. They are not as impressive as photographs of sculptures, but they should be cool. Paintings would be even better.

LDiCesare · January 1, 2003, 18:25

Example image which should be OK to reproduce legally:
(and yes it is not as flashy as those you showed)

chequita guevara · January 1, 2003, 18:42

Now that I think about it, there are high quality free images on the net, at government sites. We should check these out.

I just did a rough search for images of Alexander the Great. In addition to the statue in Thessalonika, I came up with mosaics and the sarcophogus in Istanbul. I think this can be done well without violating copyrights.

Mark_Everson · January 1, 2003, 20:15

Hi che, thanks for posting the new thread. I will go with your take on most of these issues. I just have a few things to say in response below. Otherwise assume what you said is your preference is ok by me.

BTW, could you put a link to the old one in your first post up top? Its a Clash standard that allows for easily going back to see the previous discussion on a topic. A link to the design poll thread would be good too.

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
compatable with old Netscape or fully standards compliant?
I think we should ignore everything before Netscape 6 and IE 5. Netscape 4.+ is more than five years old now. Upgrade already.

I think Laurent's points are good. As you start to roll out new stuff, itd be good to see if anyone is cut out by it before it becomes a big problem. I'm with you that if people don't want to upgrade for 5 years, that's their problem.

Site images: high quality or free?

Free and reasonably good quality is what we've had. AFAIK all the images on the existing site are legit. Kull had a CD of images of various sorts that were licensed for use on the web. So if you find something on the current site, it should be legal for our use already.

If you have trouble finding the stuff that you need free, put out an alert and we can pitch in and try to find things for you. Unless I hear otherwise I'll assume this tack is more-or-less working. OK by you?

chequita guevara · January 1, 2003, 22:03

Opera is standards compliant, BTW, . . . mostly.

chequita guevara · January 1, 2003, 22:09

Originally posted by Mark_Everson
Free and reasonably good quality is what we've had.

To be honest, I never thought the images that were used fit in with the design of the site..

chequita guevara · January 5, 2003, 17:39

If someone wishes to shell out $50USA we can get a thre month subscription to www.clipart.com, which has some very good quality photos, royalty free (i.e., free for members). One week for just $7.95 (which is a good deal, if I can grab everything we need that one week).

Mark_Everson · January 5, 2003, 17:48

Hi che:

Thanks for looking into how to get the images cheaply. I've got no problem springing for $50, that's Much better than the $1700/image figure! Just email me with your address, and the name you want on the check and I'll get it out to you sometime early this week.

chequita guevara · January 6, 2003, 01:08

Will do.

Richard Bruns · January 6, 2003, 05:13

Most of the computers at this school use Netscape 4.79 and of course I don´t have the option of upgrading them. But I can sometimes find a computer with a modern version available, so it shouldn´t be too much of a problem. Still, remember that many are in my situation.

chequita guevara · January 6, 2003, 12:46

The site should still work in older browsers, they just won't look as nice.

Gary Thomas · January 6, 2003, 14:43

Even in a school you should be able to download Mozilla, the open source version of Netscape, and use that. Where I work they have an old version of Netscape as the standard, and all the power users have switched to Mozilla.

Cheers

chequita guevara · January 6, 2003, 19:39

MarkG just wrote me and let me know that Clash already has it's own db.

I just thought about something though . . . I'll bet we don't have access to a db or php server on the mirror site.

What sez you, MarkE?

edit: spelling fix

Mark_Everson · January 6, 2003, 19:45

Hi Che:

I'm virtually certain the mirror doesn't have anything fancy available, but I'll check. But if using the db will make your life a lot easier, that's a good reason for abandoning the mirror site if we need to. Apolyton has been pretty stable with the new host, so I don't think its a huge deal to pare back down to the one site.

Gary Thomas · January 7, 2003, 17:18

Where I live and have my pub, db stands for Dominion Breweries, and their main brew, DB Draught.

What does it mean in this context?

Cheers

vovan · January 7, 2003, 18:50

I suppose it means database

Richard Bruns · January 8, 2003, 04:10

Oops, double post. Did I mention how messed up the computer system here is? Let me mention it again.

Richard Bruns · January 8, 2003, 04:13

Originally posted by Gary Thomas
Even in a school you should be able to download Mozilla, the open source version of Netscape, and use that.

Some computers are set up so that it is impossible to install anything or change any settings. Others allow you to install things, but everything you install is erased when the computer restarts or you log off. I've installed an FTP client at lest half a dozen times in order to upload my vacation pictures to my website so my family can see them. The really annoying thing is that the only computers that will connect to my camera are the ones where I can't install anything, so I have to use Yahoo Photos to upload the pictures, then move to another computer, download the pictures manually by right-clicking, and then FTP them from the hard drive to the school server.

Installing a new browser each time I log on would be a huge pain, but it sounds like I will be able to see the site; it just won't look pretty.

Mark_Everson · January 16, 2003, 21:08

Hi che:

Could you remove the "Win9x/XP" bit on all the demo downloads in the frame at left on the main page? The .jar file works for many OSs, and we don't want to scare non-Win people off. . .

Also on the D7.2 download page, where it says:

"This Demo is for Windows. There are possibilities for most other OSs, let us know if you can't use the Windows version, and if we get enough requests for a given OS we'll try to support it. ",

could you change it to:

"These instructions are for Windows machines. However, the demo can in principle be run on a wide variety of OSs because Java is cross-platform. (You can try running the .jar file and see what happens. Failing that try to find out what users of your OS do to run a "Java 2" program. If you have success with a particular OS please tell us what to do to run it, and we'll include it in the instructions. For Mac OSX just put the jar on the desktop and run it.)"

Thanks!

Mark

PS if anyone has suggested wording changes to make the above more clear, please let us know right here. But once Che updates the file we won't want suggestions anymore.

chequita guevara · January 17, 2003, 15:55

Originally posted by Mark_Everson
Hi che: . . .

Done

Mark_Everson · January 17, 2003, 15:59

Thanks Che!

Mark_Everson · January 17, 2003, 19:35

Hiya Che:

When I checked out the site I didn't see either of the changes I'd requested. Did you forget to upload the changes or something?

Mark_Everson · January 18, 2003, 17:41

Thanks for the mods Che!

Originally posted by vovansim in the Clash Overview thread(snip)
I was thinking maybe you should consider revising the main page a little bit. On the right-hand column, where it says Key Milestones, maybe you should replace that with just news? After all, if somebody comes to the main page the way it is, they will see that the last 'signinficant' activity was in the middle of last summer, and they might not notice the link to the news section, which has been updated a little over a week ago. I mean if you want the users to see project activity right away, it might be a good idea to do that.

Good Point Vovan! The news stuff was there until recently, but Che wanted to move it out IIRC. I agree that its best to have something at most a month old there, and we usually have something new on at least that timescale. Perhaps a few items of news at the top with links to the rest, and then the milestones?

What does everyone think?

Richard Bruns · January 22, 2003, 14:22

The technolgy write-up on the current web site is horribly out of date. It has things that we changed at least two years ago, and the links all lead to really old threads. The spreadsheet up there is also obsolete.

A new write-up would probably also get out of date fairly quickly. I recommend simply linking to the current thread and not keeping any large amount of text on the site. If we do want text there, it should be replaced with my first two or three posts in the current tech thread.

It would also probably be good to link to my website, which contains things like the online technology and activity editors, and the latest spreadsheets and xml files. I wouldn´t recommend mirroring those files because I change them so frequently.

chequita guevara · January 22, 2003, 18:51

Originally posted by Mark_Everson
Hiya Che:

When I checked out the site I didn't see either of the changes I'd requested. Did you forget to upload the changes or something?

You may have checked in between the time I made the changes and uploaded them. I was making some other changes at the same time and I prefer to load everything up at once, rather than make several connections. It's a little more efficient time-wise.

Richard, there is a link to your site down near the bottom of the nav bar, Clash Links, Richard Brun's Site.

Richard Bruns · January 23, 2003, 05:10

Yes, I found that link after some time. What I meant was to put it in the technology page where the link to the old tech spreadsheets is now.

LDiCesare · January 31, 2003, 16:27

As Richard noted, the Military page on the web is WAY out of date.
The information there is still very interesting, but, well, quite obsolete. I don't feel like writing a new page, but I think that some small updating like the following message at the top of the page would help:
"This page lists most of our goals but the specifics have changed a lot since it's been written. The most current information on military model can be found in this thread: http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...threadid=40836"?

wombat42 · April 29, 2003, 00:38

Um, you probably already know this, but your web site seems to have disappeared

clash.apolyton.net brings you to the main apolyton site...

Mark_Everson · April 29, 2003, 06:35

Thanks Wombat, at least I was in the dark!

I'll try Markos and Dan and see what they've got to say about it. I expect it's an unexpected result of the latest site changes.

The mirror site is at least fairly up to date in the meantime. The link for the mirror site is in the "FOR AN OVERVIEW. . ." post at the top of the forum.