Even if that is the case, I doubt if it will look much less plain than this. I'm very aware of how the web works when you are creeping along with modem dialup, and your friendly local telco's ripping money out your pocket on a per-second basis. Smaller files may also help postpone the day that the site needs a bigger home.
So if I have a choice between (say) 50k of plain-looking long topic with segmented self-links, or 50k as a teaspoon of content plus wads of graphics and script, I'll go for the first every time. There's nothing worse than clicking off a link to load in the background to be read later when you are offline, and find it's only two paragraphs with a series of links through similar content mortals that force you to remain online in order to navigate (take a bow, Ziff-Davis).
It's probably obvious that I'm not a hardcore HTML coder or designer; in fact, I saved my first hyperlinked HTML late December 2000. But I do "write" a fair bit on usenet, and have done hypertext content many years ago in the DOS era, using Norton Guides as the "engine". There were only properly completed Norton Guides hypertexts by the time I moved on; one on the ZX Spectrum and some of its interfaces, and one on the command parameter syntax of the Arj compression utility. If I ever get downloadability together, I'll sling 'em up :-)
As to my attitude on copyright; while the site is mine alone (as it is at January 2001), I'm not too stressed if I'm quoted, but I wouldn't like people to lift my content wholesale and claim authorship thereof. So if you use it as-is, please quote me as the author... I may need to point to this site one day when asked "who the hell are you, and what qualifications do you have?" You can link to it if you like - but for now, no click-floods please!
(C) Chris Quirke, all rights reserved
Back to Index