Javascript's basically used to manipulate the output, the server can do that but i think it should be JS's job since the server's only responsible to send the information requested and will also reduce the stress on the server

thats my point, with AJAX you will still be able to interact with the screen, and yes, the orriginal purpose of JS was for dynamic content (tho not mostly presentation) however with the addition of DOM, many of JS' job nowaday is simply for effects and AJAX

and some functionaly that can't be handled by the server,

however, if sticking to the SERVER/CLIENT model then the server should only serve the requested information ...

The term Web server can mean one of two things:

1. A computer program that is responsible for accepting HTTP requests from clients, which are known as Web browsers, and serving them HTTP responses along with optional data contents, which usually are Web pages such as HTML documents and linked objects (images, etc.).
2. A computer that runs a computer program which provides the functionality described in the first sense of the term.

[...]

The origin of the content sent by server is called:
* static if it comes from an existing file lying on a filesystem;
* dynamic if it is dynamically generated by some other program or script or API called by the Web server.

while it will be javascript's job to make it presentable and insert it into the DOM (hence the creation of DOM for JS)

basically what i'm saying is this:
the server serves out the html/css and JS first, which will create the interface, the JS will then make a call to the server for what ever information we might need,

and if it is already JS' job to insert the data into the DOM, why not just serve the raw data and let JS present it,

its very easy to do and very practical, ive seen many example of this on the web and from my friends

by present i mean apending it into the DOM, the fact is, theres just as many sites that don't use AJAX as there are, and the full purpose of AJAX is not for widgets, i never said it is, AJAX is only used to retrieved the data from the server, the effects are just there (thru some library), but ive never said anything about widgets

yes, the server can insert the data into the html, but it will hard code it into the HTML, and besides, i don't think it's a good method when say you want to validate the contents of a form field, if doing this solely on the Serverside, extra coding is needed just to preserve the inputs,

and it will also look unprofessional

also, for some reason i think you think that I use AJAX on every page of a site

ok, i like AJAX but i dont use it on every single page, only in the appropriate cases (a tool to get pictures or a real time chat)

yes, the processing part is the servers job, but what i mean by raw data is not a sql command or anything like that, i mean that it is processed, but not to the full extent and the javascript is then used flexibly to present (apend) the content

yes, the server is capable of doing this, but so can AJAX and JS, i just choose the latter on most cases

come on, who doesnt wanna take a try at YAHOO UI or JQuery

I'm making a redesign of the site right now and yes, its a personal site but who says i cant use ajax however, im not like goin nuts with it (using it to get the contents of the page is a little extreme) and of course, everyone wanted to try the eyeapealing effects library

but i have to admit, i'm underguilt of trying to make my site web2.0 (the badges and roundcorners ;P) but i just wanna have it for a template

my proposed design wud be something like this
http://img512.imageshack.us/img512/427/boxydesignri9.png

its not minimalist, but its soothing and since i don't use much text on my site, its perfect

how much content do you need for a about me page ;P plus, the meat of the content is in the blog which is a whole different site,

too much content and little design isn't very good either white background with a red border around the site gives a feeling that predominates the 90's and the web2.0's supposed to be a joke...

i'm not sure most of my audience will try to double zoom the page.. but they can since its not a fixed style (actually, the page won't break unless you magnify it 5 times and even then its only because of the text itself occupies half the screen)

also, ive had a homepage too but this is only a design, not the my home page

btw bizzl, it might make the file size of your html document smaller if you used lists for the menu instead of tables

and even more easier if you just replace the tables completely with divs and spans, just 1 line of code can center the div (margin:auto;) and a few more to create the same layout as your site with more attractive menu,

also, it might be nice to lighten the green background while darken the color to a heavier green or a semi-light blue

w00t, i got busy the past few days and finished this design

http://www.webshapes.org/public/templates/2007071310659298032/index.html

also, if you'll notice, non of my pages actually includes JS, but i'm still horrified by the thought of people who have it off

also, for people who have css turned off, i can only say this:

if you don't have css on, then you probably don't expect to see a good site

and yes, ik all about how each layout breaks, however, i say to myself, who are my audiences? And I came up with a pretty good answer, they're mostly friends and other webdesigners who all have at least a 800X600 resolution (tho i test it on lower) and most likely uses FF/IE/Safari (all works, tho with a few css hacks to make it work)

but the question is this, if you use tables, can you create a semantic markup that normal people can look and just go like, oh this must be the header b/c its ID is header

by replacing table i mean only for layouts, not for data (see my comment about sematics)

vertical-aligns mostly for text,

but a good way for complete centering is this

suppose you have a square the length of n, the code for it been centered would be this:
left:50%;
top:50%;
width:n px;
height:n px;
margin:-npx -npx;

actually, if you do margin -npx on a DIV with a width and height of npx at 50% left and top (of course theyre absolute positioned, it should be obvious ;)) the box will actually be effectively completely centered (and i think you knew it too :P) this is just a technique for centering block elements since inline elements can just be centered using the text-align property

AT the offset of the background, i', thinking of creating a strip of bacground and make it repeat-x only, and then create a new layer for the sun more flexible and then i can even incorporate a completely different style depending on the user's preference

they are semantic, in a way, but the mark-up itself is not

its actually more sensible to use a list for menu since a menu itself is a 'list' of links not a table o f links

the use of ordered lists or unordered is still debated, some people uses ordered lists for menu since they represent the importance of each link, but I use unoredered list since the importance of the link is determined by the placement of the links