But laces look stupid on sandals. Some might say that sandals look stupid with or without the help of laces, but I couldn't possible comment.
But laces look stupid on sandals. Some might say that sandals look stupid with or without the help of laces, but I couldn't possible comment.
I also looked at the source and concluded that some exposure to CSS wouldn't go amiss. But for all I know the site itself is vintage 1997, and you must admit it looks and works much better than most more modern sites. It was the functionality, rather than the internals, that I thought were well done.
Mike Barnes wrote in news:OOghuz+ snipped-for-privacy@g52lk5g23lkgk3lk345g.invalid:
I agree 100%.
I find an awful lot of flashy design very off-putting. My own html is 97- ish, I expect, and could use improving, but I still think steady readability, and functional layout, sensible fonts and background colours are the most important things
mike
I couldn't agree more.
Just because features CAN be included doesn't mean they should be. They're a real turn off for many of us.
So is light text on dark backgrounds.
Mary
All footwear looks stupid. But there again, so do feet.
Mary
The message from "Mary Fisher" contains these words:
That really annoys me.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.