cibgraphics

Have you tried loging as that user again? If i remember right, its tied to a google account and is stored online in their servers.

In your code, the svg is content, and should be included that way (if you really do need to include a svg like that. The others are more of a concern for organization. There are better ways to optimize your code for speed than dirting your code. As http2 becomes more adopted and browsers that don't support it die out, http requests will go away as a major concern. Or am I not getting your post.

errrr.... what line?

Graphic design I would argue is the most difficult.

In terms of using Bootstrap or Foundation. I opt for neither especially if you want to learn responsive design. These frameworks do most of the work for you, and if you want to learn how it works, don't have it do it for you so you understand how things are workings. You will be smarter for it, and will know how to troubleshoot issues down the road better. You also come off with a much lighter and cleaner CSS file in the end (because you don't have to overwrite stuff already written to theme your site). Bootstrap or Foundation are a bit bloated though they have trimmed down in size in recent years. The way that I work is using my Vanilla5 project (see link below) as a starter, and integrate NEAT (http://neat.bourbon.io/) for my grid system as well as other plugins for Grunt (http://gruntjs.com/) that help my workflow. Everyone has their own workflow and preferences, this is just mine. If you want to try them, go ahead and use Bootstrap and Foundation. See how you like them. I find them too much trouble for their worth, but thats just me. You may find it really helpful, but when you are learning, I suggest staying away from them so you get an idea how how responsive design works in its raw form. Thats my suggestion.

% is self explanitory, 50% of something is half right? em and rem are based on font size, but the difference is that rem is based on the root font size while em is based on the parent's font size. I wrote a pretty bad article about this. http://cibgraphics.com/blog/working-with-rem-and-viewport-sized-typography I actually prefer to use rem over em because it is easier to work with. I also wrote a scss mixin to make it easier. $font-size: 14px; // What ever you want but this variable is required. @function strip-unit($num) { @return $num / ($num * 0 + 1); } @mixin rem-size($value, $property: font-size) { $pxValue: strip-unit($value); $baseValue: strip-unit($font-size); $remValue: ($pxValue / $baseValue); #{$property}: $value; #{$property}: $remValue + rem; } You use it like: (include is lowercase, the forum is messing it up) @[member="Include"] rem-size(14px);

Not sure why you are hung up on this, but ok Font actually reduces in size for tablet/mobile making it harder to read. The font on the footer is horrible and hard to read. Menu is hard to click on (due to small font size) on tablet/mobile Search bar doesn't have a submit button (bad UX to force users to use enter button) The only thing that I listed that could be forgiven is thesearch bar button missing, but in reality, there should be one. The small font size for tablet/mobile is just plain stupid. But like I said, the site isn't bad... just average.

Actually the UX is average at best, especially for tablet size. If he actually wire frames it out I'm sure I could be much better.

I am actually against designing in the browser because it is much harder to account for UX issues on the fly. My process is wireframes first, then conversion to mockups in Illustrator (desktop and mobile versions [tablet as well if the design needs it]) and then conversion to HTML/CSS. When designing in the browser I see far too many have the "good enough" syndrome where they don't push the design and UX because it is already coded and they want to move on to other things in the code. Yes it is harder to design for user interaction but those should be fleshed out in it's basic form in the wirefram stage and if needs be created in an isolated envirement (say codepen) and shown to the client for approval or have a design created for stages and then animated using the many tools out there to animate graphics without coding (https://facebook.github.io/origami/). Too many things get lost/forgotten/uncared for when designing in the browser.

I always worry about the client here. They are paying and expect some level of expertise when in reality, they are not getting that. It's sad.

This is most certainly not true.

This seems overly complicated. Can you show an example of how this menu works? I am 100% positive we can condense this code into something more manageable and easier to understand and in the process solve your issue.

Are you looking to use more advanced tools and you are a newbie, or what are you trying to ask here?

You have a bunch of !importants and weird CSS all over the place. I think if you organize and structure your CSS different, you will find it. Also, use classes, not ID's. Edit : Your problem is related to the .stripe-background element. Remove it (or edit it) and you should be good.

interesting. gimmick for sure but interesting none the less.

Please tell me you are not planning on creating images for all those sizes. Plus 'widths' I assume you mean your media queries, in the which would be determined by your design, not devices.

Quick ebay search came up on one search for a bid of just over $150. I would sell that for a quick buck (really... what else are you going to do with it). Nice find.

Not sure why anyone would use the app in the first place. Grunt is far more powerful and free as well. Honestly it isn't that hard (http://cibgraphics.com/blog/grunt-js-basics-part-1)

Something like this might do you better than writing your own: http://jsfiddle.net/jtbowden/UNZR5/1/ plus if you need something more... there are literally thousands upon thousands of plugins for jquery and angular for this

Well... what are your needs. What did you like/not like about Quickfile?

ok I am lost. What functionality are you talking about. Are you talking about a content slider (you mentioned flexslider, which is a content slider), or do you need a smooth scroll functionality?

Content slider? I like Slick http://kenwheeler.github.io/slick/

lol There is no float center.

No worries.

you using: <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, minimum-scale=1, maximum-scale=1" /> ? Also can we see your site so we can see your code? Kinda hard to see the whole picture to track down what is going on.