Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 replies - 1 through 15 (of 22 total)
  • Thread Starter scarecrow

    (@scarecrow)

    I’ve got it resolved…

    Anyone else interested, you’ll need to create a conditional rewrite rule like:

    RewriteCond %{SERVER_PORT} !^443$
    RewriteRule ^billpay/water-bill/(.*) https://%{HTTP_HOST}/billpay/water-bill/$1 [R=301,L]

    This will automatically rewrite the url to https as long as the page is not already an https link. This conditional keeps it from causing a loop.

    Very handy to have this capability – thus allowing you to designate any page you want to be loaded with SSL security. Even if you type it without https.

    Cheers!

    You may want to look into using a 301 redirect in your .htaccess file on the new server you’re using.

    This will help keep your link ju-ju from Google and tell them to point it to your new domain.

    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=301+redirect&btnG=Google+Search

    Hope that helps.. 😎

    Are you using a 301 redirect?

    Forum: Your WordPress
    In reply to: My blog (beta)

    I really like the site. (of course I’m a sucker for retro but anyways)

    One question: is the bottom supposed to be uneven? The two corners do not meet, giving a disjointed look. (I actually kind of like it – but just wanted to make sure it was intentional)?

    Good luck with the design classes btw – I think you’ve got a calling and need to follow it.

    Thread Starter scarecrow

    (@scarecrow)

    Thanks man… Yeah, I’d love to forget 8×6 users – but the percentages are still too high to completely do so, unfortunately.

    Thanks again.

    Thread Starter scarecrow

    (@scarecrow)

    Hi, Chrisber, actually that is intentional. It is a flexible layout, meaning it’s designed for 1024* but will accommodate 800* users as well.

    When at 800*, the side boxes should drop to the bottom and then fill the space evenly(this was a bitch to get right!).

    It does look funky if you’re re-sizing your window, but if you’re just running full screen at 800×600 the site at least accommodates you without scrollbars. If you running 1024×768 or larger then you get the design the way it was intended. This was important since we wanted/needed the space for the content, but yet we know our audience still contains lots of older users who’re running less than ideal equipment. (We’re also supporting back to IE 5.5)

    In fact, the layout should funtion identically in IE 5+, 6, 7, 8, Firefox, and Safari. (If anyone see differently, please let me know)

    Anyways, thanks for looking! 😎

    Thread Starter scarecrow

    (@scarecrow)

    Hey, thanks for looking.

    Actually the SEO setup should be pretty optimal – as most sites are using “skip to content” type stuff, where in my markup, the h1, h2 and content come very first – then the nav and all the sidebars and what not come below. This should mean that search engines get to the content quickly and easily.

    Not sure what you mean about the contact box? There should be three boxes on the far right, if you’re browsing at larger window size. If not, the three boxes should then be positioned at the bottom below the music,photos,links boxes.

    Are you seeing something different?

    I’ll have to think about the comments showing.. comments on my site are not really a main attraction. I usually think comments are a distraction when reading – and if you want to comment, then showing them seems more beneficial. I dont know though, like I said, I’ll have to think about it some more.

    Thanks for the look and comments, much appreciated!

    — TL

    Thread Starter scarecrow

    (@scarecrow)

    Ok, I have re-thought the methodology a bit more, and decided that the route I was going was not ideal – moshu made a great point – and so now I have re-done things to be based on categories now.

    The only thing I don’t like is that I get an extra section in my url structures now – when linking from the “wp_list_categories” based menu – while the actual urls are next to the root domain – toddlambert.com/edition10/

    So I have both toddlambert.com/editions/edition10/ and toddlambert.com/edition10/

    I don’t thing that should raise any issues with duplicate content penalties.. but who knows.

    Lastly, I have not found a good method for keeping just the last 5 categories listed for navigation. Using “wp_list_categories” there is no “limit=” so for now, I have to hand-code, using “exclude=” which totally sucks.

    Thread Starter scarecrow

    (@scarecrow)

    Thanks again guys.. I appreciate all of the feedback. Sorry to be late in responding about the how-to or tutorials – I’ve been swamped and not able to put anything together, however it appears that mstegink has – so that’s cool.

    I’ve been using WP for a couple of larger projects now, and I am really starting to like it. Especially since they’ve made it possible to call child pages in menus.. woot!

    Yes, I agree about the margin or padding issues.. You need some whitespace to allow a space for the eye to rest. This is important, without space for your eye to rest, it becomes too much to take in and comes off as busy or cramped.

    I do like all the things that you mention, as those are all very important points, but dressedinvalue is right about line lenths. I would specify a width in em values and then you can still accommodate visitors with larger type, smaller viewports, etc…

    I like the stark contrast of the graphical parts of the site, everything is good there. Nice work.

    — T

    Thread Starter scarecrow

    (@scarecrow)

    Thanks for the kind words, guys.

    moshu, you make a good point on the categories… I had thought along those lines once before, but I should probably think about it again, as you may have a point.

    Thread Starter scarecrow

    (@scarecrow)

    Hmm.. thanks ladydelaluna.

    That’s kinda how I am doing it now.. I actually have a custom template, which calls a seperate sidebar.php file for each product line. And then inside of that, I am using the structure I outlined above, to segment each product category by it’s intended market (automotive, casino, etc…)

    This just seems horribly inefficient – There should definitely be a way to group pages and sub pages together.

    Using WP as a CMS is frustrating, because it is soooo close to working the way you need it, but then minor issues such as this come up, and question your use of it at all.

    Oh well, maybe WordPress 3.

    Thanks again.

    Why would I want to pay to use this instead of the free, open source: Multi-User version of WP – http://mu.wordpress.org/ ?

    Not trying to be nasty, just genuinely interested in why your product is better than the free alternative?

    Thread Starter scarecrow

    (@scarecrow)

    Thanks guys… I appreciate the looks/remarks!

    I thought about the spacers for the breadcrumbs… you have a good point.. I will try it both ways again, and see which works out better. The way that you suggest is definitely more typical, so people may be more inclined to accept them that way.

    joelwalsh, there is a “contact” link on the main menu, and there is a “Request Demo” in two other places, on every page of the site. One of my motivations in this redesign was to get people to the “action” item (in this case contacting us for more information), quicker. Can you elaborate on your thoughts of this, I am very curious about your remarks and wonder if maybe I need to make things stand out a bit more.

    Thanks again for your input, I definitely appreciate it.

    I too, would love something like this.

    I am in the same board kei3h… I need to be able to create archives based on date and organized by category.

    In my case, I have a careers section (job posts) and I have a press release section which has archives by date listed on it.

    When you view the archives, which should just display the archives of press releases and not job postings in the careers section as well…

    How can we do this? I can’t believe there isn’t something as simple as “&category=” – there should be.

Viewing 15 replies - 1 through 15 (of 22 total)