Subject:
|
Re: traffic page changes?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Thu, 13 Mar 2003 01:33:53 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
202 times
|
| |
|
|
On Thu, 13 Mar 2003, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> In lugnet.admin.general, Todd Lehman writes:
> > In lugnet.admin.general, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > > If it's inadvertant (there are some symbol substitution errors on it), and
> >
> > Sorry about that. I used ' instead of ' in a couple places. I forgot
> > that ' is only valid in XML (as opposed to all versions of HTML) and
> > Mozilla happened to display it correctly so I didn't even notice. Anyway
> > thanks for reporting this.
>
> OK so it wasn't an inadvertant layout change, then... what was wrong with
> the old layout? This one seems less polished somehow but without a side by
> side I can't quite put my finger on why.
Has this page always had the nonstandard "newsgroup-only" search box?
http://news.lugnet.com/news/traffic/
I know I've seen it before somewhere, but I assumed it was a forgotten
code relic from LUGNET's early days; I'm surprised to see it survived a
reworking of the page.
--
TWS Garrison
http://www.math.purdue.edu/~tgarriso/
Remove capital letters in address for direct reply.
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: traffic page changes? (a 2nd error to report)
|
| I personally like the new traffic page layout. The old layout was outdated. The lugnet layout is very sterile IMHO. Anyway, I have another error report for you Todd: when traffic for the market.b-s-t forum is posted, because it line wraps, the whole (...) (22 years ago, 13-Mar-03, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | Re: traffic page changes?
|
| (...) (URL) it's a rilly old page. (...) Prolly here: (URL) but I assumed it was a forgotten code relic from LUGNET's early days; Yup! (...) The reason I didn't upgrade it the other day is because I've got a new header module in the works that does (...) (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: traffic page changes?
|
| (...) OK so it wasn't an inadvertant layout change, then... what was wrong with the old layout? This one seems less polished somehow but without a side by side I can't quite put my finger on why. (22 years ago, 13-Mar-03, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
26 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
