Content Demo: Testing

Main Points

• Section1 Section 1 for Earth Chronicle Beta Template.
• Section2 Section 2 for Earth Chronicle Beta Template.
• Section3 Section 3 for Earth Chronicle Beta Template.

This page is under heavy testing. Don't expect it to make much sense at this point, but if you have any suggestions, we'd love to hear from you.

This page begins testing for October 27, 2009.

• I think the first thing I'd like to do with this is work out an effective website layout that uses 60 character wide body content.
• I also need to do some clean up. The contact form now runs the rollover image using CSS not Javascript; remove the rollover function from the JS file if I'm not going to use it.
• Also, the contact form XHTML is now consistent across sites only varying to cope with the different for attributes of the form labels. They should be referenced in the AllSitesMainMaster.master instead of the nested master pages and the form code should be in the AllSites/ folder as well, if it isn't already.
• Check and fix semantics and naming of recommended page links in the master page.
• Add new value: Apprecation. You can write articles for Wikipedia, but two minutes later someone can come along and completely revise everything. On one level that's great. It makes it very easy for people to combine their talents without even knowing each other.

  On the other hand... say what!? I can study at the library, pour hours into research, collect all the important facts, and condense them into a carefully edited easily readable article... and someone with no expertise can swap all the copy for the latest urban myth... or with the latest political rant. I can be a world renowned expert in a subject and someone who wants to pull a prank can trash my work? In extreme cases, Wikipedia allows their editors to recover from major disasters. But do you feel appreciated for your time? And your effort? Knowing that, do you think anyone writing for Wikipedia is putting in that kind of time and effort? Do you want to be an editor for Wikipedia?? You don't have to look at articles as they come in, sure, but when someone trashes an article, you have to go back and fix it. And then someone trashes it again, and you have to fix it. And then someone trashes it again... and again... and again... Do you feel your time is appreciated?

  We think that Wikipedia's system is very noble, but it's completely user-centric. While usabilty and service are important goals, the very people contributing to make the website a success should not be the sacrificial lambs bleeding to make it happen. A well built website should be easily maintainable, and once something is well-constructed, no one should have to put the sand castle back together everytime a bully comes along and knocks it down. Sand is not good for building, build in wood, or brick, or marble so the structure can stand up to the demands that are placed on it.

• Fix the superscript F references to BFPs, the factRef class. These are links, need to reference it (e.g. a.factRef)? There's a demo in the Reader's Guide page and it's not styled. Might be able to move it up with bottom margin, but I suspect it'd be more stable to use positioning and nail it to the top of the word. If that doesn't work, position:relative offsets elements from their normal position in the flow, that's also a possibility. If I want it to stick up a small negative top margin should do the trick.
• Create a Red C logo for the beta site. Should I do something special for the Atlas too or is that overkill?
• Experiment with Nav area at the top of the page so main navbar scales with the header better?
• Convert "Image Credits" & "Image Index" references to "Media Credits" and "Media References".
• Adjust AllSites folder. Too many things are breaking too much, now that I'm running a website in the same folder. It's no longer just removing some 2009/ references.

Section1

Paragraph1.

Section2

Paragraph2.

Section3

Paragraph3.