Hello friends! Sorry I haven't been on in a while. We've been busy! Construction is complete on our two cottage units and we've been hectically trying to get them decorated and furnished. Almost there! We're aiming for a September opening.
I've put a teaser webpage up until we go live next month with the full site and online reservations. Here's the URL.
Feedback appreciated.
They way to do it is to email them the stylesheet and images for your header and let them attach it in the header. The images have to go to them so they are served up by the secure server, otherwise people will get an error saying there is a security issue (which their isn't, but they don't know that). People are funny about not giving their info if they get a security warning 
. Once webervations lets you know the images and stylesheet are in place, then you can add your html to the custom headers and footers in your webervations account.
You can use inline styles within the body and you can specify mouse states in an inline style within a div, but since you have to send them the images anyway, you might as well use your own stylesheet.
__________________
And, they do charge you a one time fee for these additional images.
Catlady suggested the availability calendar opening in a new window. I don't recommend that for something that is supposed to be a part of your own site. A cleaner approach is to work with webervations to have the navigation from your site reproduced identically on webervations. That way they see it as a part of your site, rather than some frankenstein like add-on. I would not do that until you get your "template" just the way you want it.
Two other technical things if you can:
I stand corrected..yes, it should just be incorporated into the site. THough some folks don't know how to do that..so I think opening in a new window is less of a hassle than back tracking
I guess that bright green just threw me for a loop
No need to stand corrected 
Yours was a good suggestion for the way it is set up now. Most designs can fit into webervations fairly easily, but sometimes not being able to control the width of webervations can give trouble when trying to fit in a side navigation like OakCreek is using.
Since my navigation buttons are all done with CSS, I was wondering if I couldn't just include the <DIV> tags in the header along with the an embedded style sheet onto the Webervations page. However, I'm not sure if it's kosher to put a style sheet within the body of an HTML page.
Can I define the values for a:link, a:visited, a:hover, a:active in the body of the <DIV> tag?
$95 a night!!! THAT IS TOO LOW!!! I would never let it go for anything under $100 and for a cottage...$125-150 a night for sure.
Why no TV??? Many will ask for it...especially in a separate cabin.
You need more photos of what the cabin looks like inside and outside...the bedroom looks nice, but where is it in relation to the rest of the cabin? I would definitely want to see more before I booked.
Have your availabilty open in a new window for dummies that don't know how to get back to the previous page...or you may lose them
I would have a link from each of the separate cottage pages to the other, that way visitors don't have to go back and click on rooms button.
Really..that BRIGHT green has got to go..especially on the availablity page
Are you really already booked that full???? If so..that is wonderful!
I checked it in IE. Everything looks good in it. I like the way it is laid out and your pictures. In IE, the last picture on the picture page has the printing funny. That should be fixed whatever is causing it.
Also on your policy page, there is at least one place where there is no space at the end of the sentence and the next sentence starts. Also can't remember what but there is one sentence that is missing a word.
I haven't looked closely but HONESTLY on my computer it looks BRIGHT GREEN...too bright for my eyes. I prefer either a really dark backgound for contrast or something a bit more easy on the eyes.
I haven't looked closely but HONESTLY on my computer it looks BRIGHT GREEN...too bright for my eyes. I prefer either a really dark backgound for contrast or something a bit more easy on the eyes.
I thought so, too, but wasn't sure if it was just my color setup. It is definitely a vivid green.
__________________
Spare me the perky.
The website is launched!
I've been working hard to debug the thing. I'm on a Mac and don't have access to Internet Explorer, so I would appreciate input from users of that browser. It looks and works great on Firefox, Mozilla, Netscape, Opera, OmniWeb and on the very old Mac IE (though it doesn't seem to recognize CSS).
The website is launched!
I've been working hard to debug the thing. I'm on a Mac and don't have access to Internet Explorer, so I would appreciate input from users of that browser. It looks and works great on Firefox, Mozilla, Netscape, Opera, OmniWeb and on the very old Mac IE (though it doesn't seem to recognize CSS).
Wow!!!
Your photos are magnificant and sell me!
I agree your rates are extremely low, so you have ot be careful, people will wonder why they are so low.
[edited by swirt 10/30/08 at Proud Texan's request to remove a web address from the quoted text]
__________________
"What the country needs is dirtier fingernails and cleaner minds." Will Rogers
I notice you 'borrowed' my dietary restrictions paragraph word for word. Hope it works better for you than it does for me!
More pix of the cottages are needed. Interior and exterior. I'd want to know how close they are to each other and where they sit on the property. I would remove the twirly bits by the 'last minute specials' (only because I don't like twirly bits).
The picture gallery is a nice touch.
I notice you 'borrowed' my dietary restrictions paragraph word for word. Hope it works better for you than it does for me!
Yes I admit it. I'm flagrant plagiarist. Please excuse me, I should have asked.
You worded it beautifully and said exactly what needed to be said. I know what you mean though after reading the posts here and elsewhere: even though you say it EVERYWHERE and ask them at the time of the reservation, you're still going to get a_ _holes guests that don't say anything until they're served.
I didn't want that particular link to get lost on the page. Any suggestions on how I might do it differently?
p.s. Thanks for the input.
I would add driving directions from Austin as well. There are a fair number of folks that go to Canton regularly. Looks good in Firefox. NIce job!
__________________
In the Spring, at the end of the day, you should smell like dirt. ~ Margaret Atwood
Now it is scrollable and off center in Firefox. 
You will find the solution - I am in there as you are prob working on it.
Welcome to the frustrating world of B&B web design. Some days things just appear from nowhere, what the? Didn't I check that?!!!
Again, this is a good sounding board right here...many diff computers to view it from their perspective and get feedback.
It's off center because layers are absolute postioning while tables are relative......I think. I did a lot of web authoring years ago, but the game (and coding) is totally different now.
Anyone have any experience with Layers?
When the page was centered around a table, then the whole thing would move to the left or right(as it should) when you resize the browser window. However, in layers, the page remains frozen in the position you place it.
I've been playing with it all night and this morning and still can't the "block" to move like it did with tables.
I think it may require a creative use of the <div> tag or refining of the layer attribute: absolute, relative, inherit or static.
HELP!
The absolute positioning will keep it from being centered on an dynamic basis. Your current setting of forcing the left margin to 500px means that anyone with an 800x600 screen sees 500px of your margin and less than 300px of your content. Change the positioning to relative and then center it by setting the left and right margin of the container div to "auto".
Your OakCreek banner graphic should be saved as GIF from your source. That will make it smaller (memory wise) and clearer with less jpg artifacts. (GIFs for solid colors and JPGs for textures and photos).
I'd suggest not being quite so inclusive with your meta keywords. There is simply no benefit from using that many. I also suggest correct use of caps and punctuation in your meta description.
The absolute positioning will keep it from being centered on an dynamic basis. Your current setting of forcing the left margin to 500px means that anyone with an 800x600 screen sees 500px of your margin and less than 300px of your content. Change the positioning to relative and then center it by setting the left and right margin of the container div to "auto".
Your OakCreek banner graphic should be saved as GIF from your source. That will make it smaller (memory wise) and clearer with less jpg artifacts. (GIFs for solid colors and JPGs for textures and photos).
I'd suggest not being quite so inclusive with your meta keywords. There is simply no benefit from using that many. I also suggest correct use of caps and punctuation in your meta description.
I've tried putting the layers into a container <div> as you suggested. Everything went every which way. Should the syntax be something like:
<div align="auto">
<div id="Layer1" style="position: relative;>CONTENT</div>
<div id="Layer2" style="position: relative; >CONTENT</div>
<div id="Layer3" style="position: relative; >CONTENT</div>
<div id="Layer4" style="position: relative;>CONTENT </div>
</div
"auto" is a size declaration for a margin, not an alignment specification.
It would look more like this
<div id="wrapper">
other divs to be centered would go here
</div>
then in your stylesheet you would do
#wrapper {
margin: 20px auto; <--- This margin declaration specifies 20px for the top and bottom margin and the auto for the left and right.
}
Correct use? What's that? Depending on how and with what your editing your code you can end up with a bit of everything. I didn't realize that they were case sensitive. I'll have to research that.
For comprehensive edits, I've taken to using BBedit. I like it better than the code editing mode of dreamweaver.
It is not that they are case sensitive. The main reason for it is that the major search engines will choose the meta-description to use as the snippet they show if there is no closer match within the body of the page. You want it to look correct for humans because they will see it as the snippet. It is the second bit of promotion you have some control over and can contribute quite a bit to converting someone from seeing you in the search engine results pages (SERPS) to clicking on the listing to see your site. The Title tag is the other one.
It is not that they are case sensitive. The main reason for it is that the major search engines will choose the meta-description to use as the snippet they show if there is no closer match within the body of the page. You want it to look correct for humans because they will see it as the snippet. It is the second bit of promotion you have some control over and can contribute quite a bit to converting someone from seeing you in the search engine results pages (SERPS) to clicking on the listing to see your site. The Title tag is the other one.
And how many times have you come across a result from a Google search that shows the website title and then a string of random words! THAT is annoying! Worse yet, is when random coding shows up in the middle of someone's meta description or title.
everything looks ok now..i checked in IE and Firefox.
I don't know why this would affect it, but do you have a pop-up blocker enabled in Internet Explorer? Is Javascript enabled? Sometimes settings will upset I.E.
Did you empty your cache? The updated pages might not be loading until you do.
Thanks for the help.
Enabled Java, rebooted, still no picture show. Battery dying, that's it for today...
I don't know why this would affect it, but do you have a pop-up blocker enabled in Internet Explorer? Is Javascript enabled? Sometimes settings will upset I.E.
Did you empty your cache? The updated pages might not be loading until you do.
Thanks for the help.
OK...cleared cache, turned off pop up blocker, I don't know about JavaScript being enabled or not. It's not in my list of 'Internet Options' on IE. Java itself is not enabled. I can try that and see what happens but I have to shut down to do so.
And this is what happened...everything loaded faster but still no picture show. (That's using the second link you provided.)
Then it's gotta be that Javascript is not enbabled. Microsoft wanted to use ActiveX a long time ago. I don't even know if that's still around.
Thank you for help me. I'd be lost otherwise. I can write a script that will display a single picture in that space if a user's Javascript is not enabled (although I don't know why it wouldn't be). It's going to get more complicated as web pages move toward using "FLASH" in there pages.
OK, here's the firefox version. The other reply is from IE...
I'm not sure what's going on with I.E. It obviously doesn't like my table. I've done web authoring before without these kinds of results. The logo should be loading faster now. I took it through Adobe ImageReady and sliced into thirds greatly reducing it's size.
In firefox I can see the 'slices' loading. In IE it still doesn't show. It looks like what I posted earlier.
That makes absolutely no sense. There are three .PNG files that make up the logo. They're sitting inside a single cell of a table that isn't nested.
Out of curiosity, I've removed everything from the table on this page www.#removed#.com Can you see the logo now?
I was able to load I.E. 5 for Mac and the page comes up fine. It may be an issue with the PC version. I'm kind of at the mercy of Dreamweaver because the HTML I learned 10 years ago is obsolete.
IE 5 on a mac will lead you chasing phantoms. It screws up everything for no reason, which is why MS stopped supporting it or making it. There can be huge differences between a mac and pc so it is a good idea to obtain access to a PC (especially when you start making your real site). One idea might be to purchase an inexpensive machine and make it for guest use so you can make it a business expense.
I'm getting the same problem viewing here at work at UVA
Riki
__________________
Riki Goodell
Arcady Vineyard Bed & Breakfast
Arcady Vineyard Wine Tours
www.arcadyvineyard.com
Come! Let us show you the beautiful Monticello Appellation!
OK...IE results...loaded MUCH faster than firefox, but same order. Only no picture show. Here's what it looks like
This is in firefox...I'll also check that in IE:
It loads the welcome box and the 'Oak' slice. Then the photos. Then the last 2 slices of the logo. Here's what it looks like...
Must have something to do with everything being nested in a table.
I am an amateur, but I think I've been told not to use tables for layout? El, what do you think?
Riki
I don't see tables as a problem. I still use them along with a style sheet and my Dreamweaver template I create...works ok for me. I haven't looked closely at the site so don't know what is going on other than what you have seen as well. Maybe Swirt can wise us up
I note to you..the other day I saw all sorts of code showing on your home page...that is not a good thing
There is nothing completely wrong with table based design. Typically pages that don't use tables for layout tend to be much lighter in terms of the amount of code and easier to control with the stylesheet. That being said, I've seen a lot of code bloated sites using table-less design too. It mainly comes down to the designer and their ability to keep a page light or bloat it up.
I would never suggest converting a site from table to table-less just for the sake of doing it, but if the site is also going through an overhaul for some other reason, it can be worth it to rip out the tables.
El,
By the way I was wondering what is going on with the BBAV site on the Charlottesville page. I don't know if you are still their webmaster, but there is a strange listing at the bottom.
It is listed 
XLife Time BBAV Member and when you click on it it shows Becky and Norm.
Looks strange...?
Riki
Yep I still am. It is a deficit in our current database system. It is the only way I can give her access to the site. A new site is being rfp'd right now..so the database will be corrected in the new site.