Thread

Phew… its been over 10 years since I had a site I could call my own, and its taken a lot longer than I anticipated to get it up and running. Some of you who follow me on Twitter will have seen me comment about the process, and how long its taken.

Shamefully, its not EE-powered (yet!) but it will be eventually, once a few paying jobs come in!

I’d love for you to take a look anyway. I didn’t really want to pay a designer to do the site, as I’m trying to save as much money as I can as I am just starting out again in the self-employment game after a break of around 10 years.

Breathing a huge sigh of relief now, and time to move on to the next project!

URL: Richard Angstmann | Web Sites | Spennymoor | Durham

Hi Richard,

Excellent news. Glad to see you have something up now. I need to follow suit now too!! 😊

Looks great. I like minimal yet clean, concise designs and yours fits the bill perfectly!

Best wishes,

Mark

Minimal, clean and good typography. Nice.

Thanks Mark, and thanks Simon. Really grateful for your comments. I do feel I have achieved something, which is a big help when it comes to keeping my confidence up. Glad you like the clean, minimal look, its what I was going for, and I do tend to favour layouts of that kind.

This site do deliver the punch line thats simple and clean. Congrats on your (once again) commitment.
But I hope you dont mind me sharing my opinion on the current balance of the page.

The examples on the right are (due to their colourfullness) makes the site right heavy. This might cause you to not to be able to control the viewers attention. Though this is intended obviously, its just a bit heavy for my taste. Might i suggest that maybe every example might be come under their respective Options

Thanks very much for your feedback Aaron. I will be tweaking and tinkering with various parts of the layout on my dev site, and will keep your points in mind. Thanks again. 😊

Thanks very much for your feedback Aaron. I will be tweaking and tinkering with various parts of the layout on my dev site, and will keep your points in mind. Thanks again. 😊

Hope it helps. But your stuff is still stylish. Lets see more of this kind of quality design on webpages 😉.
Cheers.

HTML5 eh? 😊
Nice and clean work!
Really like the Ws navigation…simple and straight to the point.

HTML5 eh?

OT, of course—How does one go about validating HTML 5 code?

HTML5 eh?

OT, of course—How does one go about validating HTML 5 code?

same old w3c…it is part of the online validator. http://validator.w3.org/whatsnew.html

OT, of course—How does one go about validating HTML 5 code?

same old w3c…it is part of the online validator. http://validator.w3.org/whatsnew.html

Hot sake, that’s pretty sweet.

Now, is there any real advantage to coding for HTML 5.x vs XHTML 1.x Transitional? It would seem to me that browser support is probably more mature on XHTML than HTML 5.x.

Angsmann,

Nice page. Like I said on Twitter (@zachvat) mine is still just a shell, but I’m making plans on getting it up and running sometime soon. Right now, the school’s site keeps me busy enough that it’s far too easy to get home and decide I’ve had enough Web work for the day.  😊

Angsmann,

Nice page. Like I said on Twitter (@zachvat) mine is still just a shell, but I’m making plans on getting it up and running sometime soon. Right now, the school’s site keeps me busy enough that it’s far too easy to get home and decide I’ve had enough Web work for the day.  😊

I know exactly how you feel!  Thats why I haven’t had my own site for so many years. Used to come home from work and not want to look at another computer!  But now web work is my job, its completely different.

Keep me posted on how you get on, very interested to see your progress.

HTML5 eh? 😊
Nice and clean work!
Really like the Ws navigation…simple and straight to the point.

No HTML5 on my site I’m afraid. Certainly not intentionally anyway!

Thanks for your kind words 😊

OT, of course—How does one go about validating HTML 5 code?

same old w3c…it is part of the online validator. http://validator.w3.org/whatsnew.html

Hot sake, that’s pretty sweet.

Now, is there any real advantage to coding for HTML 5.x vs XHTML 1.x Transitional? It would seem to me that browser support is probably more mature on XHTML than HTML 5.x.

Coding for XHTML transitional isn’t the ‘correct’ thing to do anyway. Whether you’re using HTML or XHTML strict is the correct way to do it, and ‘transitional’ is ONLY suppose to be used for what it says, transitioning. you’re not suppose to develop for it. it almost defeats the purpose of validation.

the whole point of validation is to take html or xhtml and correctly code the page. if you’re not going to convert your site to xml based, there’s no reason to use xhtml.

Of course I don’t practice what i preach all the time, this time included. since my site validates transitional too. I was just lazy. But there is no reason to look for html5, something that is a ways off, rather than correctly coding to a strict validation first.

that’s my thought anyway