muffinboy

“title” in an img tag validates as xhtml transitional… I don’t know about strict.
you can set both alt and title on images and the browser will actually display the title when hovering over the image. alt really isn’t for that, it’s just that IE does that.

Ah, now I see what you mean. I’m running at 1280×1024 and the image (the one that used to have the white line in it) doesn’t reach all the way down to the bottom of my browser’s viewport, so I didn’t see what you meant until I made my browser window smaller.
Let me see…

No probs ??
But, the footer… I don’t see a footer in the current design at all, so I wonder what the problem exactly is.

The 1 pixel wide white line is part of the image itself. Maybe you didn’t crop the image quite right.

No, you can’t. By putting the image in the CSS it becomes part of the presentational aspect of the web page and hence it is no longer part of the content (separation of form and content).
When someone with a visual handicap visits your site with a text-only or text-to-speech browser the image ‘under’ your H2’s is effectively not there for them, hence you don’t even need to add an “alt” text.
Note: “alt” text is supposed to give a description of visual elements in the content of the page, however if you want to create a “mouse tip” balloon text when you hover over a certain element, you should always use “title”, which can be added to virtually any tag you’d like.
So, this is possible:
<h2 title="some mouse tip text goes here">h2 Title goes here</h2>

If there is no way of convincing your client, you can use MovableType (and pay for it as it appears you’re working on a commercial case) because that will easily generate static pages.
Interestingly, MT is now moving towards also providing dynamic pages because there are many benefits in doing so. Nobody involved seems to have any doubts about better or worse indexability of those pages as long as they use search engine friendly urls.

With all due respect, but advising someone to go through phpMyAdmin for a backup of another program’s data isn’t very userfriendly. We’re all a bunch of geeks who don’t think much about going into phpMyAdmin and running a backup, but it’s giving Stoofa and a lot of other people goosebumps, because they’re afraid of messing something up they don’t understand.
Putting a one-click backup function in WP as a standard will do a lot for less technically inclined users’ level of trust in the application and will make it easier for these people to recover from disaster or moving to a new host.
I think it’s as important as the latest nightly’s interface for theming your WP blog, maybe more important even ??

Looks very polished and obviously had a lot of work spend on it; you look like a pop star there ?? To me however it feels a bit cramped. On the one hand this is because the layout is a bit too wide to completely display on a 1024×768 screen, on the other hand there seems to be very little whitespace and the fonts are pretty tiny.

Just nitpicking… the L in LAMP stands for Linux. So if you are running Apache, MySQL and PHP on a WinXP machine, at best you have an AMP (or maybe a WAMP) setup.

@ryan: great! Thanks ??

@anonymous: This is new functionality planned for version 1.3. You can download a nightly and try it out, but I suggest you don’t replace your working WP installation. Rather, put it in another directory and use a different database or different table prefixes, unless you are willing to play with alpha state software. In any case, make a back-up!

Okay, yes, no they aren’t really static pages, but I hope to use them to replace the static pages on my site. And yes, I had run the upgrade script.
Anyway, I hit a couple of small problems:
1) I already had a functioning htaccess file. I went into Options > Permalinks and hit ‘Update Permalink Structure.’ Then I clicked the ‘Write mod_rewrite rules to .htaccess’ button. Something must have gone wrong, but that caused on Error 500’s on my whole /wp/ directory. I put a new, empty .htaccess file in the /wp/ dir and repeated the above actions, then everything worked well. After that I haven’t been able to repeat the problem.
2) The “Pages” generated right now look exactly the same as a normal, single post. The way I see it, it’s of little use to have “about” information under a specific date and neither is it very useful to have specific post time printed out for it.
What would be a great solution if for each Page you could specify a separate output template and css file.
3) I don’t yet have control over where the Pages end up, they always go in the /wp/site/ directory and I think it would be really useful if they could be ‘placed’ in other directories too. I’m thinking especially about a site layout like this:
/index
/blog/
/topic1/
/photos/
/about/
It would be very practical if WP Pages could handle all these locations, including the site’s root index page, while the WP blog index would still be in the /blog/ directory.

Sounds intriguing… looking forward to it ??

Maybe you could mail one of those bloggers and ask them how it’s done on their MT blog. This could give you a clue about how to approach the problem in WP.
Alternatively, check out Kitten’s Cats.

@root: thanks ??
@moshu: I did a diff with the original and you hacked around in that css file quite a bit. The problem with css, as Root says, is that there are so many dependencies that if there is ever so slight a problem with the rendering engine, and IE has more than its share of problems in that respect, very, very odd things will happen when changing even the most unlikely element in your code.
But, looking at your site, you’re not even using the left menu: your ‘menu’ div is empty. You’ve moved all that functionality to the right and hence there are no floats in the ‘menu’ div to wreak havoc in the center column.