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