Alien Media

I felt that this site was lacking in substance or something. I appreciate the design, and it's different than what's all out there, but for some reason it just didn't grasp me and say, "Wow." I appreciate the design, like I said, so that's why I gave it a 5.

This website looks sooo outdated that it looks cool somehow. That's why I gave it a good rating.

But now that I have taken a look at the source I don't think this is a good example of clean and semantic code. The code is not only "not perfect", it looks more like automatically generated nonsense. No separation of content and style, only a sliced Photoshop document.

Regarding the code I'm really disappointed this website is treated as an example to promote CSS and standards.

I don't think the code looks like nonsense, Sebastian. It's not perfect standards nor the best example of clean semantic code. It's a nice way of doing something "different" with CSS and retro graphics, and that can be just as inspiring to me.

First, I want to say thank you to all who have voted for the site and stylegala for posting it in the first place. I am flattered. Thank you.

Secondly, David's analysis is dead on. It was meant to be different, carry the branding of the company and target my core audience. The code does need to be tighter, I agree - but I also believe that the site breaks the mold of a lot of what is out there.

To me, a lot of CSS sites look exactly the same out there. Read my blog entry on dirty laundry.

Don't get me wrong, I didn't want to make this page look bad! As I've said, I did give it something between 7 and 10!

But you can't justify that code by saying the "site breaks the mold of a lot of what is out there" or "retro graphics". That's got nothing to do with the code. There are at least 21 dividers; no I didn't count, it's only that they are named as "Layer1" to "Layer 21". And what about all those MM_swapImage? And why not use background-ima

Sorry, but there's more: shouldn't the main headline be an H1 or H2 instead of a span with class="darkgreenheader" followed by a break?

Agree with Sebas, one can still use clean proper markup yet have a totally different output (visuals etc) not sounding like an "elite-ist", but taking into consideration since SG _is_ about promoting css and webstandards, you site has failed. Visually it is different, which is good i give credit to that. Also, the navi structure is a tad confusing as im not sure which is the primary or secondary, granted you have "sub channels" to differentiate but perhaps using a diff font or color for the

As I said, the code leaves much to desire. SG is not just a site about CSS and web standards, but also about design and visuals. Preferably combined.

I will agree with Sebastian.

What good is a front-end if the backend is an after thought? A part of web standards and CSS based design is about reducing overhead and maximizing mark-up and load times. Using cookie cutter code generated from Dreamweaver is not a correct way to handle the mark-up.

The design, though different, offers a good attempt but lacks substance. As a user, I quickly lost interest in reading the content and navigating the site.

"Using cookie cutter code generated from Dreamweaver is not a correct way to handle the mark-up"

Alrighty, that is just plain wrong. I believe that your comment is very shallow. Let me ask you this question, what if it WAS? Does that effect the visual impact of the site any? (It was NOT FYI).

"What good is a front-end if the backend is an after thought?" I will let you think about this a while. The question answers its self.

Thanks

I apologize if you feel I've come across brash. I am, however simply stating legitimate concerns and valid points.

I don’t feel the website is a good example of properly structured markup given the items noted.