What a mess this forum is

[HairyArsedBloke]

Most IE6 users are in the public sector or govt. departments.

Some interesting articles on this fairly recently in the Guardian Technology section:

IE6: the browser that won't die

Why the NHS can't get its browser act together

Mmmmmmmm. Let me have a look, coz I don't do public sector work.


Well, I have Normura on I.E. 7, and BNP Paribas, Credit Suisse, Cap Gemini, plus a few others on I.E. 6

Closest thing to public sector I have is Cambridge University and the European Commission on I.E. 6

[Boudica]

Feel as though I don't really have the right to be very critical but... I'm using Safari and it's really horrid, the colours / look / feel is really hard to look at, the font is very small also. I'm no expert and I don't come here often however I have to agree it is a mess. sorry.

[NickFitz]

Feel as though I don't really have the right to be very critical but... I'm using Safari and it's really horrid, the colours / look / feel is really hard to look at, the font is very small also. I'm no expert and I don't come here often however I have to agree it is a mess. sorry.

I've just checked against a page from the old forum in Google's cache: the font-size of posts is the same as it was before.

One of my primary considerations in choosing the colour scheme was that it shouldn't be a problem for those with one of the various forms of visual impairment (including colour blindness). I have used an automated tool to analyse the new design which indicates that the design complies with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines versions 1 and 2 at level AAA compliance.

I appreciate that some people might prefer a page with less contrast, or softer shades generally, but such a design can be difficult or impossible for people with various forms of visual impairment to use. If a lot of people are having a problem with it (as opposed to just not being used to it yet) then, if CUK wish, I could have a look at modifying the colour scheme, or collaborating with a designer to modify it. However, I do not under any circumstances want to compromise the site's accessibility.

Thanks for the feedback

[Sysman]

I am surprised at the number of users using IE let alone IE6.

After Firefox I have never gone back to IE.

Who wuld drink lager aftering drinking a pint of real ale ?

Ah, I know the answer to that one!

Someone whose nearest decent pint of real ale is at least an hour's travel time away.

[Sysman]

• Press Print Screen (1 sec)
• Save to desktop using paint package (20 sec)
• Open up browser tab and copy/paste: ImageShack® - Online Media Hosting
• Upload image (5 secs)
• Copy/paste image location here (5 sec)

ImageShack:

Welcome to ImageShack.

No registration required. Free to use and enjoy.
Upload: O images / videos O url O webcam

Email (Optional):

[NickFitz]

Oh, some news for the IE6 users: on the development server, I have the home page working correctly; this also means that much of the rest of the site should work, as obviously things like the header and sidebar don't change. Hopefully I can get the rest, or at least the most important parts, of the site working in IE6 by tomorrow

P.S. No version of IE yet does the rounded corners and box shadows; MS have promised rounded corner support in IE9, so remember to leave Windows Update running

[TimberWolf]

ImageShack:

Welcome to ImageShack.

No registration required. Free to use and enjoy.
Upload: O images / videos O url O webcam

Email (Optional):

I meant copy and paste the (following) URL into a browser address bar, but the URL was converted automatically into a hyper-link here, so clicking it was all that was required.

[Boudica]

I've just checked against a page from the old forum in Google's cache: the font-size of posts is the same as it was before.

One of my primary considerations in choosing the colour scheme was that it shouldn't be a problem for those with one of the various forms of visual impairment (including colour blindness). I have used an automated tool to analyse the new design which indicates that the design complies with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines versions 1 and 2 at level AAA compliance.

I appreciate that some people might prefer a page with less contrast, or softer shades generally, but such a design can be difficult or impossible for people with various forms of visual impairment to use. If a lot of people are having a problem with it (as opposed to just not being used to it yet) then, if CUK wish, I could have a look at modifying the colour scheme, or collaborating with a designer to modify it. However, I do not under any circumstances want to compromise the site's accessibility.

Thanks for the feedback

Thanks Nick, like I said I don't really use the forum much so I'm loathe to say too much. Re the font size, it must be my eyes!!! eeek!

[Sysman]

Some people are easily pleased.

I'm now trying Firefox 3.5.3 and, although my window is more than half the size of the 17inch screen, I'm currently typing this into a field the size of a postage stamp.

The rest of the window is taken up by adverts and emoticons box, neither of which I can mask out of sight.

You can get shut of the emoticons by switching to the Basic Editor (where you don't see them at all).

[voodooflux]

Thanks Nick, like I said I don't really use the forum much so I'm loathe to say too much. Re the font size, it must be my eyes!!! eeek!

I also thought it was a smaller font, but I'm wondering if it's just a different default font from the previous forum?

EDIT: just checked (with Chrome on Windows 7) and the old forum used Verdana as its default post font, while the new forum seems to be using Tahoma, the latter being more compact/narrower with less inter-character space at the same font size, which probably explains why the new font looks smaller - to Windows users anyway.