REVIEW: www.dhost.info/cultus/

Status
Not open for further replies.
L

Lucifer

Guest
#2
Thanks for the review. I use javascript because it's easier to manage the changes, so if I want to add a new section, all I have to do is change the link in one file and the changes will appear in all the pages. I used to hate having to go through all the pages just to change one small link. I've also tried giving people plenty of warning about the pdf files, but I guess I should work on that in the menu as well. Thanks for the layout suggestion; it looks more compact and makes better use of the space. The only reason I went vertical on my site is to make it compatible on smaller resolutions like 800x600. People don't like horizontal scrolling.
 
#3
Lucifer said:
Thanks for the review. I use javascript because it's easier to manage the changes, so if I want to add a new section, all I have to do is change the link in one file and the changes will appear in all the pages. I used to hate having to go through all the pages just to change one small link. I've also tried giving people plenty of warning about the pdf files, but I guess I should work on that in the menu as well. Thanks for the layout suggestion; it looks more compact and makes better use of the space. The only reason I went vertical on my site is to make it compatible on smaller resolutions like 800x600. People don't like horizontal scrolling.
Can you not use SSI instead? Like where blah-blah.shtml contains html code that's common to the pages that include it? The little catch is that other files that include another file have to be sufixed by shtml isntead of html.
 
#6
... or you can use PHP...

I'm in the "include" or "require" part...

Also I'm the part where I don't know if to make a ssi or a html file to include in the "include" or "require" part ... I feel that should be ssi but I don't know...

Oh well, maybe somebody with experience in php can understand what I'm talking about...
 
S

spirelli

Guest
#7
THe point about the PDFs at the top is very valid. Anyone would expect this to be the site navigation and not a download area. Pariculatly annoying as for me as I can't do anything while Acrobat is opening - a bit slow my machine. It should be clearly marked what these links are and maybe that actually would be a good place for the site nav.

@ Proteus
I don't understand your point about the European Language. I'd remove this from the review.
 
#8
Proteus said:
... or you can use PHP...

I'm in the "include" or "require" part...

Also I'm the part where I don't know if to make a ssi or a html file to include in the "include" or "require" part ... I feel that should be ssi but I don't know...

Oh well, maybe somebody with experience in php can understand what I'm talking about...
First of all not all webhosting accounts support php. Also not all servers support SSI.

is an html construct for an SSI. Thus you put this in html code. It is interpreted as the html code is being parsed. The file to be included has to have an html, htm, shtml, shtm or any extension that your server interprets as consisting of html code.

is similar to one before, except you can also include a php file.

REQUIRE is a php construct, so you'll use it inside php code. It has to refer to a file with the extension php (or maybe inc as well, not sure).

You can make what is in fact an html file and give it a name suffixed with php. Or it can be a combination of php and html.

Likewise a file suffixed by shtml (to indicate there may be SSI in it) may contain php code embedded as <?php ..... ?> which is resolved server side as the page is being served.
 
#9
Chris, I was refering to "include" and "require" both from php, now I'm studying about this topic. Now I would say "include" is better for me. And I would use .ssi files too.

Somehow I am feeling attracted to php instead of shtml... (at least is easier for me to write three letters than five... :wink: )
 
#10
Proteus said:
Chris, I was refering to "include" and "require" both from php, now I'm studying about this topic. Now I would say "include" is better for me. And I would use .ssi files too.

Somehow I am feeling attracted to php instead of shtml... (at least is easier for me to write three letters than five... :wink: )
Remember PHP is server side, so it needs to be parsed first ebfoer it is rendered. It may end up being slower if your page is really plain old html with nothing dynamic on it to justify using php.

I don't use the php INCLUDE because of: http://ca3.php.net/manual/en/function.include.php

I think I prefer a fatal error to a warning that can be missed. :lol:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top