On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 03:31:54PM +0100, Martin Rex wrote: > About the silly background monster photo -- could you *AT*LEAST* > use a picture name that is going to be eternally constant [...] A better course of action would be to remove it entirely. It serves no functional purpose. We all know what a meeting room full of people looks like and do not require a photo to remind us. As long as I'm writing, let me note that one of the baseline requirements for a web site like this [1] is that it should pass HTML validation. There are 10 errors and 67 warnings on the main page alone. (Of course that number will vary a bit based on which validator is used. Useful resources include "tidy", the W3C's validator at https://validator.w3.org/ the "WAVE" accessibility tool at http://wave.webaim.org/, and the WDG (Web Design Group)'s validator at http://www.htmlhelp.com/tools/validator/ -- among others.) Validating HTML is one of the best ways to minimize the problems with different browsers on different operating systems on different platforms. It's not a panacea of course, but it's part of core competency for even minimally professional web designers. I don't necessarily expect that from people who dabble or volunteer, but I certainly do expect it from anyone who's getting paid to do this kind of work: every page should validate cleanly or darn close. (Yes, I know that there are edge cases/nebulous standards, and I have no problem giving everyone a pass on those.) There's also Javascript from third parties, which raises security issues because it means that the security/integrity of this site is dependent on the security/integrity of another site that's not under the IETF's control. It would be best to kill Javascript entirely, given that it's the vector for a myriad of attacks and therefore that it's become a best practice to disable it in browsers. If there's a need for it, and it's not clear that there is, then it should be deployed on a strictly limited basis and any functionality requiring it should explicitly say so on the page(s) which do so that visitors are alerted to that requirement. I still think the right course of action is to abandon this entirely and revert to the old site, regroup, learn the appropriate lessons, and try again. ---rsk [1] That is: one with a global audience. One which needs to prioritize function over everything else. One which needs to be minimized (in terms of bytes) for efficiency and usefulness. One which needs to work in any web browser AND in any HTML-cognizant utility (e.g., wget, curl). One which needs to be readily indexable by search engine spiders. And so on. This is not a web site promoting a product or showcasing an artist or anything like that; this is a web site which provides important information to the entire world, not all of which enjoys the luxuries of cheap high-speed connections, high-powered computing devices, perfect (or any) vision, etc. Every byte must justify its presence.