Back Home

Open Designs

Community. Driven.

Site Specific: [Sticky] Site Rules & Design Submission Guidelines (Last Updated: 25 May 2008)

Bottom of Page

51 to 100 of 389

  1. <
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. >
  1.  
    I'm not trying to defend the submission and use of such language in templates which are aimed at a general audience regardless of age, but, if you were to check the template authors site (FYFI) of the design in question (gTheme) then you'd notice that it is specific to the template authors site name and slogan, not necessarily to the design. So should we restrict all submission sent by that specific template author, as you wouldn't like the linkback to a site with such language on? How far should we go to silence people from using such language?

    I'm not trying to be picky or anything, I'm genuinely curious as to what people would like to see done about it. If there is input from the majority of people saying that they would prefer not to see such informal language in templates then I'm pretty sure a rule can be added stating that no such words are allowed, and designs would be rejected for it.

    Reason I say "informal language" is because the word fucking is generally seen as a colloquial intensifier, so in this example of use in the template and authors site, instead of just saying "for your information" it's made much stronger (and even slightly abusive to some people) and with a deeper tone of voice.

    @yugnats - I cannot remember the template you're referring to, could you refresh my memory. Also whilst you may say "mods have no control over template submission's" please think about this, do admins have absolute control? Simple answer, no. The control admins have regarding what design will be accepted or rejected is based upon the rules and guidelines listed above, which will obviously be updated as and when needed if people think of, and others agree, any new rules or guidelines that should be in place.

    Can an admin reject a design because it contain's a word which they don't think suits the site though? No, because the rules are put in place by the community, that's the whole objective of the site, being community run, not just 1 or 2 people deciding what goes and what doesn't.

    If an admin were to reject a design based on their personal judgement, then people would complain that admins are abusing what power they have, it's about sticking to the rules and guidelines that are put in place by the community as a whole, if its an issue and people think something needs adding / changing then speak up and something will be done about. It's no good people saying they're not sure how to bring it up, as nothing would ever get done that way!

    Yes I'm very upfront about this, but I hope others are too. Voice your opinion and things can be done, keeping it to yourselves won't solve anything.

    // end rant and long post tongue
    •  
      CommentAuthoryugnats
    • CommentTimeJun 2nd 2007
     
    Posted By: ChristopherI cannot remember the template you're referring to, could you refresh my memory.

    Hmm, i can't seem to find the thread or design either- maybe it was on the old OWD forum that got deleted. i believe it was a template that had a bunch of religious things in it and a few people mentioned it in the forum but it wasn't removed (i assume it was because it didn't break the rules).


    Posted By: ChristopherVoice your opinion and things can be done, keeping it to yourselves won't solve anything.

    That's exactly what I did and I might add there are very few who are willing to question things here for some reason.

    Not trying to start trouble or anything but sometimes it takes these threads to get action (which is what we are getting now, thank you).

    bigsmile
  3.  
    "i believe it was a template that had a bunch of religious things in it" - Ooh that just sparked something and I remember that, it was to do with a specific religion and people thought it may be intruding beyond personal beliefs and that people should just simply stick to Lorem ipsum for dummy text (or something along those lines anyway) but yeah, that thread certainly rings a bell smile

    "That's exactly what I did and I might add there are very few who are willing to question things here for some reason." - neutral <- The blank face sums it up rather well in my opinion... I don't know why people won't speak their minds, I guess not much can be done to change that though which makes it worse in some respects. So shall we both just sit here and wait for others to speak up about their thoughts, or... ummm yeah, input guys and girls, input!

    p.s. No trouble / offense / anything of that sort taken or implied wink
    •  
      CommentAuthorgnome
    • CommentTimeJun 2nd 2007
     
    <rant>
    I feel that such informal language should not be permitted in templates or forum posts. I feel that such language should be censored with Astrixes( *), and that we use an identical policy in the forum. The other (censorship) option is to delete any offending posts or designs. With forum posts, there is a third option of replacing the content of the post with /* removed for language */. I would prefer to simply make conservative use of the Asterix. In the rule, there should be a given set of words which will be censored if used inappropriately. Everything has its place, even bold, red blinking curses, but I don't believe that the forum or templates here is the right place.
    </rant>
    •  
      CommentAuthorSyuk
    • CommentTimeJun 3rd 2007 edited by Syuk on the 03rd June 2007 at 09:58:20 EDT
     
    Personally it does not bother me at all, and I am sure that 99% of people are familiar with the language, and it is a very common phrase here in the UK.

    But just imagine if FYFI had titled his / her template 'for your f*ing information' (not Gtheme) and then that string appeared on all the sites who are using the OD RSS feed.

    I am just speaking my mind, and don't want to target FYFI. It is a good template (and site) and I also don't want to recommend a tactic that could ultimately 'silence' people either, but maybe some board decision on profanity would be useful, indeed it is possibly legally required for this website.

    What would the consensus be if a very good designer posted a template and linked to a overtly racist / homophobic / religous zealotry homepage?

    My own sensibilities were not offended by looking at the template in question , but as Gnome says there is a place for everything.

    Peace bakie
    •  
      CommentAuthorjanpd24
    • CommentTimeJun 5th 2007
     
    Well, I think there is a context for almost everything -- just like tables! In case of the submitted design (gTheme), that particular word doesn't add anything to it. It's not like it matches with the theme in some way or with the content. In fact, the designs is called gTheme, but I can't figure out why!

    That it's been submitted here at OD means it's in the the hope that someone might download and use it. Depending on what sort of audience you envisage for your templates, you should do all you can to not alienate them in any way.

    Unless of course, that's the whole idea in the first place!

    Yes, I know I'm digressing slightly from the subject at hand, which is to understand what to do in this sort of situation in the future! sorry!
  7.  
    As a Christian I was bothered/offended by the language. I agree with gnome that such language should not be permitted in templates or the forum. I think that if someone comes to this site and sees such language they are more likely not to come back. I don't, however necessarily think that censoring the links on a template should be done.
    • CommentAuthorzanzibar
    • CommentTimeJun 6th 2007
     
    Hi All,
    I just wanted to introduce myself and say hello to everyone. I think there is some fantastic talent on this
    site and enjoy reading all your comments. I just submitted my first design and hope it will be approved.

    I'm keeping my fingers crossed!!
    • CommentAuthorDreamckr
    • CommentTimeJun 7th 2007
     
    Hi!

    I have been taking the time to read the posts of this community and find it a well put together community. I like the controversy that FYFI has made. I have read the opinions and find myself asking this question, "Is this not an OpenDesign area?" I personally don't hold any negativity towards FYFI template. I think its creative, inventive, and imaginative.

    The template itself is sound and clean. I can understand where people may get their feathers ruffled but at the same time think about this... The author's own website is FYFI. They created their own blog in the same manner and is just sharing it with others who may share the same attitude. I think it was wise of the author to name it (gtheme). I consider FYFI just as their logo. So maybe it shouldn't be on all the templates but ultimately people are going to wide up at FYFI home page showing the offensive language and its their design and logo so is it really offensive language? Do you really want to have put restrictions on author's sites as well? bakie

    Anyway I am eager to submit my own design soon and hope that it will be approved.

    See ya bigsmile
    • CommentAuthorzanzibar
    • CommentTimeJun 7th 2007
     
    Question about buttons

    4. Buttons (e.g. W3C) are not allowed in designs..

    I presume this to mean that we cannot put W3C buttons on a template but that navigation buttons are fine?
    •  
      CommentAuthorLobsterMan
    • CommentTimeJun 8th 2007
     
    zanzibar:
    Any button that is part of the design, such as navigation is OK. Unrelated buttons, such as validation buttons etc. can not be used.
    • CommentAuthorzanzibar
    • CommentTimeJun 8th 2007
     
    Thanks for the clarificaton Lobsterman..

    I submitted my first design two days ago and it still shows as pending, but when I view the file in the admin sector it shows an error, "No design specified". The file is zipped and everything is OK on my computer. Am I doing something wrong? I have seen other posts where people have had difficulties uploading.
    How long does it take for a file to be accepted or rejected?
    Thanks anyone for your input
  13.  
    Designs may take anything from a couple of days, to a couple of weeks, to be approved. It depends on how many are submitted before yours, generally it will take on average 4 days.

    However as an example, when Open Designs was first started everyone submitted their designs quite rapidly and it took a while to get through them all. This was because we have to make sure each design receives a fair amount of time of the front page, as that is where the main promotion for the templates and designers is.

    I'm sure you'll understand when your design hits the front page (later today wink) and see how long your design stays on the front page :)
    •  
      CommentAuthorkirby145
    • CommentTimeJun 14th 2007
     
    My suggestion


    Designs would not be allowed if

    1. The design itself contains inappropriate language

    2. The design links to sites with inappropriate language under the Creative Commons Attribution license (X.x), meaning that the link is not allowed to be removed by the users.

    • CommentAuthorgraystatic
    • CommentTimeJul 11th 2007
     
    those sound good kirby145 bakie
    •  
      CommentAuthorperthmetro
    • CommentTimeJul 11th 2007
     
    Why not give the administrators the right to delete/change the offending words rather than refuse the design outright?
    •  
      CommentAuthorDENiAL
    • CommentTimeJul 29th 2007
     
    Posted By: perthmetroWhy not give the administrators the right to delete/change the offending words rather than refuse the design outright?


    I think it would be better to refuse the design, and leave the decision to the author. I personally left OWD, because my designs where altered without my permission before they where downloaded, I know I'm not the only one who came to the same conclusion.

    Personally, My belief, is "open" source, means more then, "free". It also means, I can say, and do what I want and release it to the community, to do and what the want with it. If the language bothers you, then don't download it. Don't support it, and don't encourage it, however, ostersizing someone because they don't hold the same belief structure as you do, seems like it would be the wrong thing to do in an open community.

    Of course, this is all my opinion on the matter, and, as stated above, this is a community driven web site, therefore, I have to respect the wishes of the community as a whole, so what ever is decided, I will backup 100%. :D
    • CommentAuthorprydonian
    • CommentTimeOct 15th 2007
     
    Ouch, no javascript. I have this nice script that makes a breadcrumb trail that looks very nice in a navbar.

    Oh well, rules are rules. cry
    • CommentAuthorMike Weiss
    • CommentTimeOct 15th 2007
     
    Posted By: prydonianOuch, no javascript. I have this nice script that makes a breadcrumb trail that looks very nice in a navbar.

    Oh well, rules are rules. cry


    You can always provide the script in the template, and leave it up to the end user to implement it.
    • CommentAuthorprydonian
    • CommentTimeNov 26th 2007
     
    You can always provide the script in the template, and leave it up to the end user to implement it.


    Fair Point. Thanks!

    Nathan surfing
    •  
      CommentAuthorarwen54
    • CommentTimeDec 12th 2007
     
    Question: I see quite a few sites now have sponsor links in the footers and they have released the template under the CC licence. Now, I need admin to clarify that those sponsor links can be removed by anyone who downloads the template as long as the link to the template designer is left intact, correct?
    • CommentAuthoronebucktemplates.com
    • CommentTimeDec 12th 2007 edited by onebucktemplates.com on the 12th December 2007 at 17:20:38 EST
     
    If themes are released under CC and nothing else is specified in the template files I think you can remove everything, even designers link. For example I don't know what templates you are referring to but I have templates released under CC and have 2 links in the footer on some templates but I didn't write anywhere that you have to leave those links but it would be nice to do so wink

    Attribution (by): Licensees may copy, distribute, display and perform the work and make derivative works based on it only if they give the author or licensor the credits in the manner specified by these.
    •  
      CommentAuthorgnome
    • CommentTimeDec 12th 2007 edited by gnome on the 12th December 2007 at 17:43:51 EST
     
    (this is not official, just what I think based on my knowledge of copyright laws and licenses ) You must leave the link to the author. Always lean on the safe side, and email the author for details if you are unsure.

    If you are using a CC License and not clearly specifying your method of credit, this site's FAQ will specify the manner of attribution (a link in the footer) at some time in the future. Some people use the CC license, but don't actually understand it, and really should be using public domain if they don't care, because that gives corporate users here the freedom they need to use templates.
    • CommentAuthoronebucktemplates.com
    • CommentTimeDec 12th 2007 edited by onebucktemplates.com on the 12th December 2007 at 18:40:42 EST
     
    may copy, distribute, display and perform the work and make derivative works based on it only if they give the author or licensor the credits in the manner specified by these.

    It is kind of tricky wink

    I apply CC license so no one can say it is their work like it happens with public domain ... If there is no link in the footer I don't mind but I will mind if someone says it is designed by Them.
  25.  
    It also depends on what version and type of Creatives Commons licensing is used. Without specific information like that it is impossible to advise on the exact terms of use.
    •  
      CommentAuthorgnome
    • CommentTimeDec 12th 2007 edited by gnome on the 12th December 2007 at 19:20:04 EST
     
    The basic premise of the licensing scheme used here is this: PD work does not require attribution, although it is courteous to attribute the template maker; CC work does require attribution, and is a good bit stronger, since the creator holds copyrights; GPL is for those who really want their work protected, and know what the GPL is all about.

    EDIT: I sound like a broken record.
    • CommentAuthorMattKern
    • CommentTimeDec 12th 2007
     
    I have often wondered who sets the licensing scheme for each template here.

    Some templates specifically say "no commercial work" but the general vibe of OD is creative commons attribution.

    Which one wins?
  28.  
    Posted By: gnome(this is not official, just what I think based on my knowledge of copyright laws and licenses ) You must leave the link to the author . Always lean on the safe side, and email the author for details if you are unsure.

    If you are using a CC License and not clearly specifying your method of credit, this site's FAQ will specify the manner of attribution (a link in the footer) at some time in the future. Some people use the CC license, but don't actually understand it, and really should be using public domain if they don't care, because that gives corporate users here the freedom they need to use templates.

    I completely agree, it is always a good idea to leave the designed by or designers link somewhere.
    •  
      CommentAuthorgnome
    • CommentTimeJan 13th 2008
     
    Given the new templates by csgraduate, I think we need to state that semantics are VERY important, and that not considering them can result in designs not being accepted, because the only tags used in that person's designs are the div tag, the img tag, the a tag, and the br tag.

    I am not just hating all machine-coded designs, because dreamweaver and NVU can pull off semantic code. Photoshop however, can't do anything right. The design supports neither vertical stretching or internal scrolling to accommodate large amounts of content. The CSS is redundant and inefficient, and the absolute positioning makes editing difficult.

    I would like to request that once a decision is reached (regarding whether or not semantics is grounds for removal), csgraduate's designs be removed on grounds of poor code quality.
    •  
      CommentAuthorLobsterMan
    • CommentTimeJan 15th 2008
     
    Posted By: gnomeGiven the new templates by csgraduate , I think we need to state that semantics are VERY important, and that not considering them can result in designs not being accepted

    I agree.
    Also, styling the details is what makes a good design. I'm starting to notice more and more "design shells" with a cute image on top, different colors for the areas of the page, but not much style beyond that. Maybe we should ad a rule about that.
    •  
      CommentAuthoryugnats
    • CommentTimeJan 15th 2008
     
    Posted By: LobsterManMaybe we should ad a rule about that.

    i think its a good idea as well :)
    •  
      CommentAuthorJJenZz
    • CommentTimeJan 15th 2008
     
    I second the semantics thing! It's not helping the web if we're allowing people to download badly written XHTML & CSS.

    It would also help people like csgraduate to learn and improve if their submissions were declined as you can explain to them that they're semantics are not up to standard, at which point you'd hope they'd try and improve. I would anyway.
    •  
      CommentAuthorJJenZz
    • CommentTimeJan 15th 2008 edited by JJenZz on the 15th January 2008 at 10:43:42 EST
     
    Posted By: SyukPersonally it does not bother me at all, and I am sure that 99% of people are familiar with the language, and it is a very common phrase here in the UK.

    I agree.

    Posted By: DENiALIf the language bothers you, then don't download it. Don't support it, and don't encourage it, however, ostersizing someone because they don't hold the same belief structure as you do, seems like it would be the wrong thing to do in an open community.

    Totally agree with this one too... I generally don't like seeing religious templates/discussions but I wouldn't expect anyone to remove them. Freedom of speech and all that jazz (although it's not so free nowadays lol).
    • CommentAuthorMike Weiss
    • CommentTimeJan 15th 2008
     
    One thing I notice in a lot of the templtes that stick out to me is that a few of them are putting a number of links that are not relevant to web design or a template theme (Like this one). It worries me that these people, and not only Templates Maker, are trying to use us for link distribution more than they are trying to pump out nice designs.

    Is there a way we could limit promotional links to one designer link? Does anyone else see any value in this?
  35.  
    75% of approved templates seem to have at least 1 "sponsered" link in them, and for some people the only reason they submit templates is so they can fill it with links they sell. So my thoughts are certainly yes, we should limit it somehow!
    •  
      CommentAuthorSean
    • CommentTimeJan 15th 2008 edited by Sean on the 15th January 2008 at 18:23:43 EST
     
    @Christopher: Didn't we already cover this? It's sort of reminds me of the whole inserting links in the footers without permission from designers.

    Granted, these links are being placed by the designers, but this might open up a whole new can of worms allowing people to sell links to be in the footers of designs on OD which brings up another question... the licensing of each design and removing link credits. Do these "sold" links fall into any sort of licensing agreement?

    Also if people continue to game OD for SEO links like this, it could hurt us as well over time. OD isn't a link farm but it could turn into one as it's starting to seem with design links not being related to the design or the person who created the designs.
  37.  
    I'm sure it has been covered at some point in general, but cannot remember what was decided. Dependant upon other people's opinions I'm all for limiting the extra links it templates, the only problem is I know people will either complain, or find a way to get round it...

    For example, we restrict all unrelated links, such as "Make Money Online" but them what constitutes as unrelated, could a template with an image of a bank then be seen as related to making money? However links for design sites would normally always be related, so people would just aim to sell links to design orientated companies.

    Urgh, where will this end?! And more importantly, what can we - Open Designs - do about this?
    •  
      CommentAuthorgnome
    • CommentTimeJan 15th 2008 edited by gnome on the 15th January 2008 at 19:38:05 EST
     
    My suggestions: (these may will need to be edited)
    • Each template will be checked for quality before submission. If it appears to only be a shell, or is not semantically coded, it will be declined, and a message will be sent to the designer telling them that they need to use block tags other than <div>
    • Each template is permitted one functional external link, to the designer's own site. (no linkfarming our template resources). If a template is found containing more than one such link, all external links may be rendered #. I realize that designers will complain, but that is the best way I can see this working (good for users, not good for designers).
    • Templates listed here as under the creative commons license, and either specifying another non-CC license, or specifying no license at all, is under the CC Attribution license. (this will involve an email to ALL designers explaining this, and how their rights have changed).
    • If the first rule isn't used, than this also applies: any template requiring that a link to the author be maintained does not protect links to the sponsors. They may be left alone, mutilated, or removed as the end user sees fit.
    My rules are brutal, but effective. We need to protect the rights of the end-user, because not one person will use a template in which they have to leave a full battery of links in.
  39.  
    Sounds like a plan gnome. I will have to modify some of my templates' outgoing links and submit them again. But definitely a great idea and something that needed to be done. Is this rule applicable for everybody's old templates as well (not that I have any here), or would it only be applicable to new submissions ? Just some food for thought.
    •  
      CommentAuthoraaroncampbell
    • CommentTimeJan 15th 2008 edited by aaroncampbell on the 15th January 2008 at 23:21:01 EST
     
    The problem with the rules is that not one user will use a template that isn't created either. I think the rules may keep some designers from creating templates. I only have one design here, because I'm really not much of a designer. It has extremely clean code, and people can use it as a base to build off of. Is it a shell? If so, I would not have "fixed" it, it would just be one less design here (471 people have downloaded it, and I have seen it being used on multiple sites).

    Also, my template is released as Public Domain, but some have kept my link anyway. Even so, I probably wouldn't have submitted it if I couldn't have linked to some of the causes that I support (Invisible Children, Acholi Beads, and even Surviving America which is a blog by James Pearson who works for Invisible Children and founded Acholi Beads). I'm not trying to be rude, but that was one of the motivating factors for me to finish the design, package it, and upload it. If those links are to be removed, I'd rather have the design removed.
    •  
      CommentAuthorJJenZz
    • CommentTimeJan 16th 2008 edited by JJenZz on the 16th January 2008 at 04:55:32 EST
     
    Posted By: gnomeEach template is permitted one functional external link, to the designer's own site. (no linkfarming our template resources). If a template is found containing more than one such link, all external links may be rendered # . I realize that designers will complain, but that is the best way I can see this working (good for users, not good for designers).
    I totally disagree with this rule.

    Posted By: aaroncampbellI think the rules may keep some designers from creating templates.
    And this is why.... I personally enjoy submitting templates to sites like these, not only because it makes me feel good to help others but also because it helps me earn money in the long run. If I were unable to post links that could potentially make me money, then I probably wouldn't bother submitting templates. I design for a living, I cannot afford to be making freebies with no return (as much as I would like to).

    The way I see it, if a template appears to be taking advantage of link farming by containing links that are unrelated to design/development... they should be removed as they have nothing to do with what this site is about IMO.. Who cares if somone is making money for adding 5 design related links to their site? Those links might help out one of our members since most are here looking for design/development.
    •  
      CommentAuthorsnop
    • CommentTimeJan 16th 2008
     
    Posted By: JJenZzI totally disagree with this rule.

    Me too. I often use images in my templates that aren't mine. If I can't give a credit link to that person, then I'm not going to use the image, which will lower the quality of the template, hurting the user.
    • CommentAuthorzanzibar
    • CommentTimeJan 16th 2008
     
    I agree with Snop.
    Not everyone is a great photographer or an ace with Photoshop. I think you should maybe extend the links to 2, one for the designer and the other to attribute only artwork or photos, which are often from free resources anyway.
    • CommentAuthorMike Weiss
    • CommentTimeJan 16th 2008
     
    How do we deal with those that are using the links for SEO? One possiblity is to append rel="nofollow" to all links in the preview. Your links would still be visible, and the downloaded version would not be modified so anyone using your template would still give you the SEO boost as long as they retain the credit link.
    •  
      CommentAuthorarwen54
    • CommentTimeJan 16th 2008
     
    The thing is there is no way you are going to be able to enforce what the end user does with your work when you release your templates or themes to the Open Source community, period.

    For example, a client of mine hired me for WordPress consultation and was using another theme designer's WP theme that had other links (un-related) in the footer. We kept the link to the designer intact and removed the others.
    Have my client and I violated the licencing agreement? No, I don't believe so because we left the credit to the theme author intact. Links to other sites should not be a pre-requisite for the end-user to utilize the template, imho.
    •  
      CommentAuthorJJenZz
    • CommentTimeJan 16th 2008 edited by JJenZz on the 16th January 2008 at 14:43:50 EST
     
    Arwen, i think you have got the wrong end of the stick here... we're not talking about what people do with the links on the template after downloading them, we're talking about what TODC should do about templates that are being submitted here purely to link farm through the sites template previews tongue

    what people do with those links after downloading a template is obviously not in our control, as you say.
    •  
      CommentAuthorgnome
    • CommentTimeJan 16th 2008 edited by gnome on the 16th January 2008 at 15:22:22 EST
     
    I didn't say the rules would be perfect the second I wrote them down. That is why they will need to be edited a great deal before being added. So links to the following would be allowed (this is all theoretical at this point):
    • Credit links to author, photgraphers, free resources used, and applications used in development
    • other links to either non-profits, personal sites (must not be selling products or services directly), or quality, relevant free resources of a legal nature. (This part is hard for me to word)
    What do you guys think of those?
    • CommentAuthorodt
    • CommentTimeJan 16th 2008 edited by odt on the 16th January 2008 at 18:04:13 EST
     
    Posted By: gnomeother links to either non-profits, personal sites (must not be selling products or services directly), or quality, relevant free resources of a legal nature. (This part is hard for me to word)

    I am not entirely sure that this is a good idea.

    I have recently uploaded a template because I knew that by doing so, I would not only be helping the community but would also be gaining hits to my new startup company (design/template related) that is due to launch early this year.

    If I were not allowed to add links to my template, I would not have submitted it... this is a template which nearly 300 people have downloaded at this point (in 2 days). I am not trying to brag, I am simply trying to point out that enforcing this rule will reduce the amount of high quality templates (which are evidently in high demand) from being submitted and I am sure I am not the only one that feels this way.

    The community will lose out in the long run IMO.

    P.S. I agree that badly coded shell templates full of links should be removed as they are not helping the community in return for their clicks. I don't think those of us that do spend time and effort creating something worth downloading should be penalised though.
  49.  
    I am not trying to brag - pfft ;)

    But yeah, its a difficult subject to create rules for, as there will always be a way to get round it anyway. Which makes it pointless having a rule which will blatently fail before it kicks off... probably best to concentrate on the semantic markup and structure of designs, Jason - I'll reply to your email with details thoughts and details tomorrow on an idea I've had for that, will involved a bit of PHP scripting if you're up for it.

    Only other thing would be the rel="nofollow" links to every link in every template preview as suggested above.
    • CommentAuthorodt
    • CommentTimeJan 16th 2008
     
    Posted By: Christopher I am not trying to brag - pfft ;)

    mowahaha tonguewink

51 to 100 of 389

  1. <
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. >