So, in keeping with things that I like (or happen to have bookmarked ;), I hit this one the other day. This is one of my hobbies and while I’m not currently a member, I hope to be one some day (or at least as good a player as some of the members I’ve met – they’re incredible).

In looking at the site, it’s not bad, but IMO could really use a make-over. I might toss something together and send it over… who knows. At any rate, judging by the look, I had a feeling that it was not up to snuff. I was right.

Originally written in HTML 4.01 Transitional (yay) and CSS, the validator claims the HTML has 34 errors, but the CSS is error-free. Imagine that. The only problem with the CSS then, should be file size. And once I convert the table based mark-up to semantic HTML 4.01 Strict, that becomes a non-issue. See the numbers.

It didn’t take long to work this one through. I’m having issues with the menu in IE6, but given I’ve done 2 or 3 similar menus that work fine, I should be able to figure out why this one is not being treated nicely. Methinks I’ve stared at it too long for the moment. Fresh eyes after the holiday.


theirs (some images are random):


Keeping with the same numbers as last time, here are the real results:


  • HTML lines: 297
  • HTML file size: 21,752 b
  • CSS file size: 13,638 b
  • CSS images: 0 b
  • Total: 35,390 b


  • HTML lines: 213
  • HTML file size: 16,949 b
  • CSS file size: 2,168 b
  • CSS images: 109 b
  • Total: 19,226 b

A grand savings of 16 kb on this one. And once again, ALL my code validates. The real conclusion from this site is that I’m really getting good with the code. Between work and this stuff, I’m able to crank out the HTML and CSS very fast with minimal initial errors. This is fun practice.