Finally! 


Fred finishes updating for today 

I poked around Blind Links (well, the index). Had to fix all the main page links.

Then, I looked in WWWH and had the same problem as CFHP.

I also ought to have segregated the text and images into separate directories, but when I was originally designing the pages, I was going for simple, straightforward, and small HTML. So, by lumping the appropriate images and text into the same directory, I'd be able to save having to specify directories, which saved time, but caused a mess as more and more images were added.

The Javascript on WWWH is about as fancy as I'm supposed to be here.

Of course, all these problems can be traced back to the fact that I didn't get enough "free" space with my hosts. If I had been allowed all the space I needed when I needed it at first, I wouldn't have had to split all my sections up. The good part of that is that I was able to more freely design the different parts of FDN to make the most useful designs I could. After all, one size doesn't fit all in terms of shape of sites. Would Google's spartan look work for Amazon, or vice versa?

Of all the designs, I think WWWH is the oldest, and FDN is the newest, of course.

FDN's current yellow/white stripe version seems to remind me very much of the original design, which I have backed up somewhere.

FDN: Designed as a tree
Fred Duck's Weblog: Designed by template
CFHP: Designed as a tree
FDN: CGA: A showcase for a title, with links easily nearby. Attempting to squish into a small space, as well as being easy to update.
Game will be overhauled soon...ish...
Blind Links obviously needed a horizontal navigation style, and thus, received one.
Profile & Talks were attempts to update FDN more often/make FDN more than just a tree. It didn't work.
WWWH is supposed to be compact and offer a lot of information which should be easy to find. Sparing use of colour should lead the visitors' eyes to finding the important bits quickly.

What, am I patting myself on the back? I feel like the person who designed these pages left me something kind of as a present, since I really never paid much attention to them before. Of course, that person was...me.

The unsettling thing now is that FDN: CGA's gallery is now created by default templates automatically, so it doesn't actually match FDN: CGA's style. I hate using frames (because frames are far trickier to use than many people imagine) or new windows, so I carefully place back links on each page. You should never NEED to back out of a page via the browser's back button. (I know there are a couple times where you have to on CFHP and CGA, because I feed you a text file.) However, as it's a template, and I can't easily customise it, I couldn't get a 'back' button on it. (I think I got it once, but darned if I can duplicate THAT.) As a result, we have a...uh, no! new window. Galleries are now separate folders, as well. :O

In January '03, I lost almost everything I'd ever created or downloaded in my life. As a result, many of the images contained in here have a lot more significance than one could imagine.

There were a couple large interruptions in updates, which has caused me some confusion. As a result, as I was updating FDN: CGA this morning, I made a chart of all the different character sets I'd used. This is, in CGA, who appeared and with who else. There are 74 unique sets. And a few mistakes. Melanie, for example, has 2 #4 and #5 images, and Tiff's filename system changed from tm to tif, though the numbers remained consistent. (Since these codes started back in '98, I was using an 8.3 file-naming system.)

I was surprised by the number of sets, as well as the number of mistakes.

My most favourite sets (by number, not including Dusk, who has 23 titles and 2 CGs!!) are:
Kim 12
Crys 9
Kain 8
Dawn 7
Melanie 7
There are 37 'single' sets, which is coincidentally, half.

Kim is also the toughest of my favourite characters to draw, as you probably noticed by the percentage of iffy pictures of her.

I'm surprised Melanie is "only" 7 and Tiff is 4 (that low?) and Jäne is 5 (that high?).

Will and Opal are 4, but darned if I can remember how to draw either one! 

Posted: 土 - 1月 1, 2005 at 11:13 午後          


©