LDraw.org Discussion Forums

Full Version: Banner differences
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
A little detail that just caught my eye: The banner image and text on Parts tracker is different from other parts of the site.
Most pages have the same image of a partly transparent 2x3 brick and the text "LDraw.org Centralised LDraw Resources" in British English spelling. The image on Parts Tracker is similar but without the inner tube and with a slightly different colour and camera angle, and it has the text in American spelling: "Centralized LDraw Resources".
Yes, you are right. Never realized that. Also the Logo here is with TM marked. I think we should use also this on the PT pages.
Good catch. We must have missed that page when we switched to the new logo.

We also started colour coding the logos with the switch. What colour should we make the PT page?

Whats about violet?
It's a colour between red (the main LDraw site) and blue (our forum).
So it would represent the parts and the discussion in my eyes.

Actually, scrap that. Apparently I made a logo for the PT, but we never installed it.

[Image: BannerPartsTracker.png]
True - I have that green banner (and a yellow one for the stalled Parts Requestor), but because the page templating for the Parts Tracker has evolved over time (it's not a CMS), it is harder to "install". Let me take a look.
That's done, and I think I found all the places where it is defined. Please let me know if you find any problems.

In earlier discussions, we agreed to put the main LDraw logo on the left (linked to www.ldraw.org) and the Parts Tracker logo on the right (linked to that www.ldraw.org/library/tracker).
It looks so far ok. Position is same as in the forum (left ldraw.org - right special), but the background color needs adjustment IMHO.
The graduated background image is the same as the main LDraw site.

The whole page structure really needs re-working to take advantage of contemporary web technology/standards. It dates from the days when table-based layouts were the only way to implement such webpages. That's not the case nowadays.
Awesome. Thanks! I'd totally forgotten about it (hence the two posts).

Pages: 1 2