1 Impressive figures!

Quite a lot of money! :) Nice layout, I’m sure with more time that site could look a lot prettier to Joe Human rather than to Joe Browser.

posted at 12:14 pm on November 21, 2003 by David

2 Why's the content at the bottom?

I’m just wondering why the center column (the bulk content of the page) is near the bottom of the page with all the left and right column stuff above it? Not that I think that there are many Slashdot visitors using Netscape 4, but also for search engine optimization I thought that one of the points of semantically marking up a page is to get the content as close to the top of the page as possible (something I’m doing while redesigning my own site).

Other than that I think the retooling is a great idea (and a great job was done here) not only for helping to save on code-bloat, but also to bring CSS layouts even futher into the spotlight.

posted at 12:20 pm on November 21, 2003 by Joe Kaczmarek

3 Very Nice

My first thought regarding the xhtml (before getting to the css)was ‘where is the skip to content link?’ After all, there is alot of scrolling in any non-css situation just to get to the most prominate section of the site. But then I see you added the link at the top right corner of the final example and it would appear on the first line in a text-only browser. Good job. That link is the only difference I see between the original and yours.

I wonder: should you have included that link in all the examples and maybe even mentioned it breifly?

Oh yeah, nice print layout, and, if implemented, I would not be stuck with that ugly (in my opinion anyway – thats the beauty of alternate style sheets) green.

posted at 12:24 pm on November 21, 2003 by waylan

4 Not the engine

FWIW, what you are talking about has nothing to do with Slash itself, but merely the templates/theme. Well, in your case, that’s not entirely true, since slashcode would need a few minor tweaks to work with XHTML, but other than that, it’s all in the templates, not the code/engine. Slash itself cares nothing about whether you use style sheets or semantic tags etc., that’s all up to the site designer.

posted at 12:26 pm on November 21, 2003 by pudge

5 So can we change the templates?

So would Slashdot let us have the ability to toy with their templates? Or do they use some kind of default template packaged with Slashcode? Essentially, I am wondering if there is any way we can change the publicly available Slashcode to make the eventual template changes to Slashdot.

posted at 12:44 pm on November 21, 2003 by Hung Nguyen

6 Sure, but let's see the comments page. (+4, Insigh

Quite a feat, seems like the discussion pages would be even more of a challenge though.

posted at 12:51 pm on November 21, 2003 by Ryan Schroeder

7 Impressive!

Wow, very impressive bandwidth figures! It’s hands-on savings like this that’s going to impress the big ones.

posted at 01:15 pm on November 21, 2003 by Brian Andersen

8 Beat me to it!

I find it so amusing that ALA decides to make an article out of converting Slashdot’s templates to XHTML. I have been toying with the idea for quite some time, and even started laying the groundwork. I found the steps you took in order to accomplish this task to be rather insightful. My approach was to take it “module” at a time. I think your version of “deconstruction” works well, and I will probably use it in the future.

Absolutely brilliant. Great job. While I am not affiliated with Slashdot in any capacity save having a slashdot ID since 1996, I’d be more than happy to help patch the Slashcode system.

Again, great job!
CMH

posted at 01:18 pm on November 21, 2003 by Christopher Harrington

9 A start in the right direction

Not sure Dan remembers, but I had provided him with a link to someone who is working on an XHTML version of slashcode:

http://strict.openflows.org/

posted at 02:02 pm on November 21, 2003 by Christopher Rivard

10 I like separating positioning and formating

Thanks for the idea of separating the positioning from the formatting. One of those “why didn’t I think of that” ideas :) Great article.

posted at 02:12 pm on November 21, 2003 by Ian Roberts

Discussion Closed

New comments are not being accepted, but you are welcome to explore what people said before we closed the door.

Got something to say?

Discuss this article. We reserve the right to delete flames, trolls, and wood nymphs.

Create a new account or sign in below if you’d like to leave a comment.

Forgot your password?

Subscribe to this article's comments: RSS (what’s this?)