icons for the tip harvester (was Re: [thesite] Re: [***forum] page

[David McCreath]

aardvark wrote:

>>From: Dean Mah <dmah at shaw.ca>
>>
>>They work for me.  But the thing that works for me the most is the
>>"Key" that you've included at the top.  Once people internalize the
>>key, I think that they will work.
> 
> +1, although the icons look a little stout... 


Can you be more specific? When I read "stout", I read "fat" or "heavy" 
or "big".

"Heavy" I can see. They're black and white, therefore not very subtle, 
especially in reference to the rest of the page.

> if they're gonna be side 
> by side, there needs to be a bit more balance, 


Again, I'm not quite sure what you mean. Balance between the week 
groupings (week/icon/icon | week/icon/icon)? Or between the icons? Is it 
an alignment thing?

> but i like where you're going...


Cool. Just didn't want this to be an excercise between me and Dean. :)


> also, can we skip <h2> and go right to <h3> from an <h1>?  i don't 
> believe so...


Bad coding on my part. I was thinking that the section header was an 
<h2>, and didn't verify it in the code before writing my stuff. The 
example we're discussing was an attempt to create the listing entirely 
without tables, and it should be an <h2> if we're going to use that 
approach.

However, I'm not convinced that table-less is necessarily the best way. 
I'll play around with it more later.

thanks for the input.

David