Thanks very much for your input Charlie. Much appreciated.
I’m somewhat in between now. As according to another friend of mine, as NEW layout doesn’t follow the visual hierarchy of the rest of the site, the old one is better.
Any more opinions?
First of all happy new year to all of you.
I’m here to seek some advice on design of some specific portion of the site. I’ve started working on WP version of an already approved HTML template here. It is almost complete, excluding project single page, as i was not fully satisfied with it. Therefore, I’ve made some adjustments to design for WP version.
Previously, i had 3 layout of portfolio gallery images, as can be seen here:
1: http://ovari.mstrends.com/portfolio-single.php?format=image-stack 2: http://ovari.mstrends.com/portfolio-single.php?format=image-slider 3: http://ovari.mstrends.com/portfolio-single.php?format=image-gallery
Now, although from features point of view, providing decent amount of options to customers is good but this layout of single project page has a few limitations.
1: The width of media (555px) used in single project page, seems a bit narrow, specially when there is a trend of using bigger images in portfolio single page.
2: If we use a single image (having height less than project desc, at the right), or any embedded media (audio, video), the layout seems a bit unbalanced. For example:https://www.dropbox.com/s/55ofhu84tiu7b8p/old.png?dl=0
Keeping in view these limitations i’ve drafted a new design of single project page, which overcomes above mentioned points. It can be seen here:https://www.dropbox.com/s/73hjaidw3bxznuc/new.png?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/o5ieiqvk0u7gvb3/new-1.png?dl=0
Now, what you people think, as a designer, as a customer, which proposal is best. Any advice would be appreciated.
Payoneer card-to-card transfers are possible for envato users, atleast for me. Alternatively, you can request multiple withdrawals each to different paypal/skrill accounts.
I also vote for placing Font Awesome in your theme/plugin and properly enqueueing it.
Using a CDN for Google Web fonts is one thing – if they don’t load, you have a system fallback.
If Font Awesome icons don’t load, you’ll get a bunch of unknown characters since they’re not in the standard unicode set.Sidenote: loading jQuery from a CDN is your choice if you’re managing your own site (though then you have to manually keep it up to date), but if you are releasing a theme or plugin publicly you should NEVER do that – it would be very irresponsible (and also isn’t allowed by ThemeForest)
For jQuery in WP, i agree, using CDN version is bad practice as WP has built in jQuery library. But for HTML templates i think CDN version is better (for caching and other benefits). However, if you want to be on safe side you can always include local jQuery version as fallback. Same goes for CSS.
But yes, one can simply use local files for the sake of simplicity
I do not know whether the use of a CDN is ok in this case, what if the template you bought a few thousand times and CDN stop working? This is not a large file, it is better to have it locally.
The answer is same i think, what if google fonts api site goes down? as most of the templates/themes here use those fonts. Although, in this case file size is only 20 KB, its not much, it goes down to ones own choice. However, speaking generally, there are many advantages of using CDN version: Why should I use Google’s CDN for jQuery?