ThePortForum.com

A very special refreshment indeed.

That piece of code needs major rewrite. Will do.

Two thoughts if you are contemplating a rewrite:

i) Would it be possible to annotate threads with more than, say, 3 replies with "(possibly & ors.)" or something to that effect? Particularly after an offline a lot of TNs from different people get posted in the same thread but, at the moment, only the initial poster's initials are repeated.

ii) Could the data from the corked/spoilt bottles be somehow incorporated? Perhaps a symbol to the effect of: might be appropriate (or we could design a few for the different problems)?

Very good ideas.

1. • Admin: can the data I am sent include the number of replies or posts in that thread?
   • All: would it be more informative to have a boundary at three posts, or just to state the likes of ‟7 posts”? What presentation would be most useful? (Currently I can manually override the shown name, as has been done for a very small number of TNs maybe Admin could provide a list of all posters in that thread?)
2. • Admin: can data from Corked/Spoilt Ports - Name and Shame come as a table of TNs? I reckon that this is true only for those who have linked to the TN, but even then having the SQL parse the p= and t= link formats might be too tricky.

jdaw1 wrote: [*]All: would it be more informative to have a boundary at three posts, or just to state the likes of ‟7 posts”? What presentation would be most useful? (Currently I can manually override the shown name, as has been done for a very small number of TNs maybe Admin could provide a list of all posters in that thread?)

Having the number of replies might be a better idea. The problem is, of course, differentiating replies which are notes from ones which are just general chat.

JacobH wrote:

jdaw1 wrote: [*]All: would it be more informative to have a boundary at three posts, or just to state the likes of ‟7 posts”? What presentation would be most useful? (Currently I can manually override the shown name, as has been done for a very small number of TNs maybe Admin could provide a list of all posters in that thread?)

Having the number of replies might be a better idea. The problem is, of course, differentiating replies which are notes from ones which are just general chat.

This might be slightly misleading as many TN's are comprised of multiple posts from the taster to record the evolution of the wine in the decanter.

Are we in danger of trying to be too clever here?

Is the current index fit for purpose? I think it is.

DRT wrote:Is the current index fit for purpose? I think it is.

I also think that it is fit for purpose. But it is worth exploring whether it can be fit for other purposes, without losing the current fitness-for-purpose. And adding the number of replies or posts is easy SQL, and easy for me. Can we do more? I don’t know.

I would also vote for not changing the initials of the person who made the first post. I don't tend to use the information on who the poster was, just read the note if I want to know what someone thought of the port.

I vote to leave things alone on the initials of the poster.

But linking to a name and shame list would be interesting.

I’m not sure if this is known (based on the posts, ante, concerning Adam’s) but I note that 1963 Adams is missing from the list.

TN indexes (alphabetical, date) updated.

jdaw1 wrote:TN indexes (alphabetical, date) updated.

There is probably a symbolism that I am missing, but I note the colour of the date changes from blue to green in the third post of the alphabetical list.

JacobH wrote:There is probably a symbolism that I am missing, but I note the colour of the date changes from blue to green in the third post of the alphabetical list.

Whoops. The symbolism is that Tom noticed that some Nacionals had become Novals (very unfortunate), so I fixed just that post. Will re-fix.

Might I suggest that early July would be a good time for an update to the tasting note indices - other priorities permitting?

Coincidentally, I wrote to ARK just before you posted asking for updated data.

Done. Will be done again in early July.

A handful of points following a quick review of the updated index.

We seem to have multiple entries for the Dalva White colheita 1952 port:
Dalva (aka Presidential, aka C da Silva) Golden White colheita
1952: JDAW on 04 Jan 2008
Dalva (aka Presidential, aka C da Silva) Golden White Reserve
1952: RMW on 22 Jun 2007
Dalva (aka Presidential, aka C da Silva) white colheita
1952: JGH on 24 May 2009

JDAW seems to have been very busy recently:
F70 JDAW+DRT on 01 Sep 2007
F70 JDAW on 19 Oct 2008
F70 JDAW on 27 Nov 2008
F70 JDAW on 26 Dec 2008
F70 JDAW on 04 Jan 2009
F70 JDAW on 26 Jan 2009
F70 JDAW on 17 Apr 2009
F70 JDAW on 13 Jun 2009

And, finally, does anyone fancy volunteering to pull together some useless stats from the list? Things like "most tasted port" and "favourite shipper"?

AHB wrote:We seem to have multiple entries for the Dalva White colheita 1952 port:
Dalva (aka Presidential, aka C da Silva) Golden White colheita
1952: JDAW on 04 Jan 2008
Dalva (aka Presidential, aka C da Silva) Golden White Reserve
1952: RMW on 22 Jun 2007
Dalva (aka Presidential, aka C da Silva) white colheita
1952: JGH on 24 May 2009

Needs work.

AHB wrote:JDAW seems to have been very busy recently:
F70 JDAW+DRT on 01 Sep 2007
F70 JDAW on 19 Oct 2008
F70 JDAW on 27 Nov 2008
F70 JDAW on 26 Dec 2008
F70 JDAW on 04 Jan 2009
F70 JDAW on 26 Jan 2009
F70 JDAW on 17 Apr 2009
F70 JDAW on 13 Jun 2009

Just as AHB rather likes his Vesuvio, I like F70. What’s wrong with that?

AHB wrote:And, finally, does anyone fancy volunteering to pull together some useless stats from the list? Things like "most tasted port" and "favourite shipper"?

When I return from travels, I can tackle this. Easiest done from the spreadsheet.

jdaw1 wrote:

AHB wrote:JDAW seems to have been very busy recently:
F70 JDAW+DRT on 01 Sep 2007
F70 JDAW on 19 Oct 2008
F70 JDAW on 27 Nov 2008
F70 JDAW on 26 Dec 2008
F70 JDAW on 04 Jan 2009
F70 JDAW on 26 Jan 2009
F70 JDAW on 17 Apr 2009
F70 JDAW on 13 Jun 2009

Just as AHB rather likes his Vesuvio, I like F70. What’s wrong with that?

Absolutely nothing. I think there is a certain stylish decadence to opening a bottle of Fonseca 1970 once a month for the last 6 months. I doff my hat in admiration (and a little envy).

AHB wrote:"most tasted port"

Port: Count
F85: 14
Mg91: 12
D83: 11
G77: 11
W85: 11
F70: 10
G75: 10
G85: 10
Cr77: 9
D77: 9
F80: 9
G70: 9
Mz85: 9
F66: 8
F77: 8
G83: 8
V96: 8
W77: 8

AHB wrote:"favourite shipper"?

Well, most tasted shippers are as follows.
Graham: 82
Fonseca: 73
Quinta do Vesuvio: 73
Warre: 60
Taylor: 54
Cockburn: 52
Dow: 52
Croft: 48
Quinta do Noval: 38
Taylor Quinta de Vargellas: 38
Ferreira: 31
Niepoort: 28
Quinta do Noval Nacional: 28
Morgan: 25
Martinez (Harvey): 24
Gould Campbell: 22
Offley Boa Vista: 21
Sandeman: 21
Graham Malvedos: 20
Smith Woodhouse: 20
Fonseca Guimaraens: 18
Kopke: 18
Ramos-Pinto: 16
Warre LBV: 16
Delaforce: 14
Quarles Harris: 14
Kopke colheita: 12
Quinta do Crasto: 12
Berry Brothers & Rudd Selection: 11
Quinta do Noval colheita: 11
Quinta de Roriz: 10

All the ‘years’ (being things in the ‘year’ column), with frequencies, are as follows.
1985: 111
1970: 107
1977: 85
2000: 78
1994: 76
1963: 70
1983: 64
1995: 48
1991: 47
2003: 47
1997: 46
NV: 43
1966: 41
1980: 37
1996: 36
2001: 31
1987: 30
2007: 28
1975: 27
1988: 22
20Y: 21
1999: 20
1992: 19
2005: 19
1960: 18
10Y: 18
1998: 17
1955: 16
1967: 15
1978: 15
1989: 14
2004: 14
1927: 11
1982: 11
1990: 8
1947: 7
1958: 7
1986: 7
1945: 6
1948: 6
1952: 6
1984: 6
2002: 6
2006: 6
1912: 5
1935: 5
1950: 5
1968: 5
1974: 5
1976: 5
1908: 4
1920: 4
1931: 4
1937: 4
1964: 4
1965: 4
1979: 4
1863: 3
1890: 3
1944: 3
1962: 3
1815: 2
1896: 2
1900: 2
1917: 2
1924: 2
1933: 2
1938: 2
1957: 2
1972: 2
30Y: 2
1830: 1
1853: 1
1873: 1
1875: 1
1904: 1
1906: 1
1932: 1
1934: 1
1940: 1
1941: 1
1942: 1
1953: 1
1961: 1
1971: 1
‘believed vintage’: 1
40Y: 1

So most frequent shippers are Graham and Fonseca, and most frequent years are 1985 and 1970, and all of G85, G70, F85, F70 appear in the top few shipper-vintage combinations. Which makes sense.

Helpful links to the TN indices, omitted in earlier post: alphabetical, and date.

And yet, oddly, V96 is the only Vesuvio on the list (in a tie for 14th) despite Vesuvio being tied for the 2nd most tasted shipper with Fonseca.

Is it, perhaps, time for another TN sort?

Yes, and I can cope now. Alex K.: pls send data.

Could I request that Chief Admin 1 and TN List Admin Snr co-ordinate between them the required processes to update the TN indices please?

AHB wrote:Could I request that Chief Admin 1 and TN List Admin Snr co-ordinate between them the required processes to update the TN indices please?

That’s partly me. Admin: pls send missing data, or more than that, tonight, and I’ll cope tomorrow. Because if not tomorrow, at least ten days later.

TN indexes (alphabetical, date) updated.

Sorry for the delay.

This will be the last update into the current thread format. The next update will be to a tpf-located dedicated HTML page, as the maximum size of post (60k characters) is starting to become too inconvenient a limit.

jdaw1 wrote:TN indexes (alphabetical, date) updated.

Sorry for the delay.

This will be the last update into the current thread format. The next update will be to a tpf-located dedicated HTML page, as the maximum size of post (60k characters) is starting to become too inconvenient a limit.

Many thanks, as always, for doing this. One request: could we have a table of contents for the new html page? Something simple like a list of the shippers with anchors and hyperlinks to take you to the start of the listing for that shipper would be very helpful when getting an overview of the notes (I appreciate the browser’s inbuilt search function might also assist).

JacobH wrote:]Many thanks, as always, for doing this. One request: could we have a table of contents for the new html page? Something simple like a list of the shippers with anchors and hyperlinks to take you to the start of the listing for that shipper would be very helpful when getting an overview of the notes (I appreciate the browser’s inbuilt search function might also assist).

I have been building something along those lines.

Whilst not understanding why I can no longer FTP to , let’s use the following temporary links to draft indexes sorted alphabetically and by date. Do people like the proposed new format?

I think the internal linking simplifies navigation, and the all-in-one-place helps maintenance. Good or bad? Comments?

Users of Mac Firefox might encounter bug 537444. If you do, please report whether Office 2008 is installed.

jdaw1 wrote:Whilst not understanding why I can no longer FTP to , let’s use the following temporary links to draft indexes sorted alphabetically and date. Do people like the proposed new format?

I think the internal linking simplifies navigation, and the all-in-one-place helps maintenance. Good or bad? Comments?

Looks good to me. I presume ’s CSS can be applied to bring it stylistically in line with the forums?

One suggestion: what about sticking the line with the links (beginning ‟Contents:”) into a div that is positioned at the top of the screen with position:fixed. It would then stay on at the top of the screen as the user scrolls down the page (or follows the internal links). That would both allow the elimination of the return to the top links and make it easier to search for, say, Cálem followed by Warre.

PS. Croft Pink Port has its own homepage...

JacobH wrote:I presume ’s CSS can be applied to bring it stylistically in line with the forums?

If I add a lot of class=! piffle, which would weigh down the page. More lightly I could choose the background to match, and make the <hr>s appropriately red.

JacobH wrote:One suggestion: what about sticking the line with the links (beginning ‟Contents:”) into a div that is positioned at the top of the screen with position:fixed. It would then stay on at the top of the screen as the user scrolls down the page (or follows the internal links). That would both allow the elimination of the return to the top links and make it easier to search for, say, Cálem followed by Warre.

I spy a man with a large screen. Try browsing from a mobile device.

JacobH wrote:PS. Croft Pink Port has its own homepage...

Happiness, I suppose.

Actually, the CSS is harder than I thought. A user of phpBB is allowed to choose from amongst various styles: it isn’t obvious to me how that choice could best reach a non-dynamic page. Suggestions welcomed.

jdaw1 wrote:Actually, the CSS is harder than I thought. A user of phpBB is allowed to choose from amongst various styles: it isn’t obvious to me how that choice could best reach a non-dynamic page. Suggestions welcomed.

Pass. There might be some sort of cookie that could be tapped. Otherwise, I might just suggest applying the default css which (experimenting locally) makes most of it look how the site looks to those not logged in. Or, as you suggest, a short custom CSS to make the appropriate bits red (&c.).

jdaw1 wrote:I spy a man with a large screen. Try browsing from a mobile device.

Not at all; I’m typing on a Dell Mini 10v which has a 10.1'' screen. Changing <p>Contents: to <p class="floatingmenu">Contents: and adding this CSS: .floatingmenu {position: fixed; top: 0px; background-color: white; } produces a usable result (albeit requiring some tweaking). For mobile devices, the position: fixed could be removed with <style type="text/css" media="handheld">.floatingmenu {position: static;}</style>, assuming your device obeys the media="handheld" attribute.

Though, of course, this might all be a bit over the top...

Both CSS’d. Also the position of the contents fixed wrt window for the date but not for the alphabetical index.

The paragraph with position fixed with respect to the window is ’orrible. Other opinions?

JacobH wrote:Croft Pink Port has its own homepage...

Not worth the effort. I have ≤1 URLs per ‘shipper name’ (e.g., ‟Croft” or ‟Croft Quinta da Roeda”), that name then being qualified by a type (e.g., ‟colheita”, ‟garrafeira”, ‟crusted”, ‟ruby”, ‟pink”). Making the URLs per shipper×type would too closely resemble effort.

I have moved the draft indexes to what will probably be their location if approved by the team:
www.theportforum.com/jdaw1/tasting_note ... tical.html and
www.theportforum.com/jdaw1/tasting_notes_date.html.

If approved I will also:

• Change the front page of to point to the new indexes;
• Delete the contents of each of the posts in the current index threads, replacing the first posts with links.

Not sure I feel it's necessary to link to the House's website (or a def of the wine type) in the TNs; that kind of reference information perhaps should be a single link at the top of the TN catalog to a post that provides the list. Also, as the catalog grows (esp by Date), it becomes highly redundant.

SushiNorth wrote:Not sure I feel it's necessary to link to the House's website (or a def of the wine type) in the TNs; that kind of reference information perhaps should be a single link at the top of the TN catalog to a post that provides the list. Also, as the catalog grows (esp by Date), it becomes highly redundant.

Indeed, in the thread-date-index those links are absent. Happy to lose them in the date index; no harm in keeping in the alphabetical.

jdaw1 wrote:Happy to lose them in the date index

Deleted, hopefully to the satisfaction of all.

New location: www.theportforum.com/Tasting_Notes/alphabetical.html and www.theportforum.com/Tasting_Notes/date.html.

Old TN indexes (alpha, date) disabled and de-stickied.

Deleted the following:(this is my backup, in case a reversion is wanted).

Having trouble changing the links on the front page working on it.

jdaw1 wrote:Having trouble changing the links on the front page working on it.

Fixed by admin, using magic unknown to me. New indexes are go!

Feedback on the new TN Indexes:

1. Well done and thanks to JDAW.
2. I don't like the green coloured font. It looks horrible and not very easy to read on my PC in IE7. Please can we have something dark and easy to read?
3. Can we please have the TN Index stickies back as I found them useful? I know that this means the indexes would be linked to from two places but is that a problem?
4. On the date sorted index the vintages listed at the top are shown as YYYY or YY and bold or not bold, with no obvious reason why. I suspect that JDAW has tried to highlight generally declared vintages by showing them as four digits in bold but this wouldn't be obvious to a non geek and, predictably, he has neglected to give 1975 its rightful place. Can we have a nice clean list in consistent format?
5. The NV section only contains the shipper's name in the description. Please can this also include whatever description is in the relevant TN subject field?
6. "This is an date-sorted list " shouldn't have an n in it.

Derek

DRT wrote:Feedback on the new TN Indexes:

1. Well done and thanks to JDAW.
2. I don't like the green coloured font. It looks horrible and not very easy to read on my PC in IE7. Please can we have something dark and easy to read?
3. Can we please have the TN Index stickies back as I found them useful? I know that this means the indexes would be linked to from two places but is that a problem?
4. On the date sorted index the vintages listed at the top are shown as YYYY or YY and bold or not bold, with no obvious reason why. I suspect that JDAW has tried to highlight generally declared vintages by showing them as four digits in bold but this wouldn't be obvious to a non geek and, predictably, he has neglected to give 1975 its rightful place. Can we have a nice clean list in consistent format?
5. The NV section only contains the shipper's name in the description. Please can this also include whatever description is in the relevant TN subject field?
6. "This is an date-sorted list " shouldn't have an n in it.

Derek

This is all part of the prettying-up that I mentioned to jdaw1. As a starter for ten I'd say it's pretty impressive - it's working. The aesthetics will undoubtedly improve. Genuinely well done Reginald Mole Husband.

DRT wrote:I don't like the green coloured font. It looks horrible and not very easy to read on my PC in IE7. Please can we have something dark and easy to read?

Choose a colour on jdawiseman.com/papers/trivia/web-colours-hsl.html. Pro tem, colour changed to 006600.

DRT wrote:Can we please have the TN Index stickies back as I found them useful? I know that this means the indexes would be linked to from two places but is that a problem?

I would also like a link directly from the list of TNs. But having those threads (why both?) would be useless: look at them now (alpha, date). Not sure what is the best course of action here.

DRT wrote:On the date sorted index the vintages listed at the top are shown as YYYY or YY and bold or not bold, with no obvious reason why. I suspect that JDAW has tried to highlight generally declared vintages by showing them as four digits in bold but this wouldn't be obvious to a non geek and, predictably, he has neglected to give 1975 its rightful place. Can we have a nice clean list in consistent format?

I think it strikes a good balance: good declarations are bold, and those and ≤1912 are four-digit, acting as a century repeater for the larger number of ’YY years. Other opinions? To be helpful, a quotation:

The date-sorted index wrote:Contents: • Top • 1815 1830 1853 1860 1863 1866 1873 1875 1890 1896 1900 1904 1906 1908 1912 1917 1920 1924 1927 1931 ’32 ’33 ’34 1935 ’37 ’38 ’40 ’41 ’42 ’44 1945 ’47 1948 ’50 ’52 ’53 1955 ’57 ’58 1960 ’61 ’62 1963 ’64 ’65 1966 1967 ’68 1970 ’71 ’72 ’74 ’75 ’76 1977 ’78 ’79 1980 ’82 1983 ’84 1985 ’86 ’87 ’88 ’89 ’90 1991 1992 1994 ’95 ’96 1997 ’98 ’99 2000 ’01 ’02 2003 ’04 ’05 ’06 2007 Believed Vintage • 10Y 20Y 30Y 40Y • NV.

Note that having all four-digit makes the list still longer, and I think harder to read, whereas all two-digit rather denies the antiquity of our preferred tipple.

DRT wrote:The NV section only contains the shipper's name in the description. Please can this also include whatever description is in the relevant TN subject field?

For the moment assume the answer is ‟no”.

DRT wrote:"This is an date-sorted list " shouldn't have an n in it.

Sackcloth and ashes!

jdaw1 wrote:

DRT wrote:I don't like the green coloured font. It looks horrible and not very easy to read on my PC in IE7. Please can we have something dark and easy to read?

Choose a colour on jdawiseman.com/papers/trivia/web-colours-hsl.html. Pro tem, colour changed to 006600.

Better. Thanks.

jdaw1 wrote:

DRT wrote:Can we please have the TN Index stickies back as I found them useful? I know that this means the indexes would be linked to from two places but is that a problem?

I would also like a link directly from the list of TNs. But having those threads (why both?) would be useless: look at them now (alpha, date). Not sure what is the best course of action here.

Do others have any good ideas here?

jdaw1 wrote:

DRT wrote:On the date sorted index the vintages listed at the top are shown as YYYY or YY and bold or not bold, with no obvious reason why. I suspect that JDAW has tried to highlight generally declared vintages by showing them as four digits in bold but this wouldn't be obvious to a non geek and, predictably, he has neglected to give 1975 its rightful place. Can we have a nice clean list in consistent format?

I think it strikes a good balance: good declarations are bold, and those and ≤1912 are four-digit, acting as a century repeater for the larger number of ’YY years. Other opinions? To be helpful, a quotation:

The date-sorted index wrote:Contents: • Top • 1815 1830 1853 1860 1863 1866 1873 1875 1890 1896 1900 1904 1906 1908 1912 1917 1920 1924 1927 1931 ’32 ’33 ’34 1935 ’37 ’38 ’40 ’41 ’42 ’44 1945 ’47 1948 ’50 ’52 ’53 1955 ’57 ’58 1960 ’61 ’62 1963 ’64 ’65 1966 1967 ’68 1970 ’71 ’72 ’74 ’75 ’76 1977 ’78 ’79 1980 ’82 1983 ’84 1985 ’86 ’87 ’88 ’89 ’90 1991 1992 1994 ’95 ’96 1997 ’98 ’99 2000 ’01 ’02 2003 ’04 ’05 ’06 2007 Believed Vintage • 10Y 20Y 30Y 40Y • NV.

Note that having all four-digit makes the list still longer, and I think harder to read, whereas all two-digit rather denies the antiquity of our preferred tipple.

Perhaps create a grid rather than a long string? Like this:

Top
1815 1830 1853 1860 1863 1866 1873 1875 1890 1896
1900 1904 1906 1908 1912 1917 1920 1924 1927
1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 1939
1940 1941 1942 1943 1944 1945 1946 1947 1948 1949
1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959
1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969
1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979
1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Believed Vintage 10Y 20Y 30Y 40Y NV

Using a different colour rather than bold to denote general declarations would keep the table neat. As you are using html you do of course have the option of creating something much more attractive than this BBcode version.

jdaw1 wrote:

DRT wrote:The NV section only contains the shipper's name in the description. Please can this also include whatever description is in the relevant TN subject field?

For the moment assume the answer is ‟no”.

I will asume that means you are still working on making it meaningful.

jdaw1 wrote:

DRT wrote:"This is an date-sorted list " shouldn't have an n in it.

Sackcloth and ashes!

I should think so too.

DRT wrote:Perhaps create a grid rather than a long string? Like this:

Top
1815 1830 1853 1860 1863 1866 1873 1875 1890 1896
1900 1904 1906 1908 1912 1917 1920 1924 1927
1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 1939
1940 1941 1942 1943 1944 1945 1946 1947 1948 1949
1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959
1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969
1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979
1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Believed Vintage 10Y 20Y 30Y 40Y NV

Using a different colour rather than bold to denote general declarations would keep the table neat. As you are using html you do of course have the option of creating something much more attractive than this BBcode version.

Great idea almost. A table: every year from 1810 to 2009, in rows of ten, with non-functioning years as non-links in pale grey, and good declarations in bold. Extras below. To be implemented later.

Please comment on the new improved www.ThePortForum.com/Tasting_Notes/date.html.

Comments:

1. Much better.
2. We have obviously not drunk nearly enough old port.
3. Perhaps the logo could go somewhere else to allow the table of vintages to move further up the page?
4. The classic vintages still don't jump out at me, even in bold. I still think different colours would give a better contrast.
5. Personally, I would prefer a more simple font, such as Arial, as Serif-style fonts become difficult to read on a small screen. I'm not sure what the standard font in on but would suggest that that should be used for consistency of style. At the moment the style looks more like another website rather than
6. All that said - great work and thanks again to JDAW for giving up his time to do this for us.

Derek

DRT wrote:Personally, I would prefer a more simple font, such as Arial, as Serif-style fonts become difficult to read on a small screen. I'm not sure what the standard font in on but would suggest that that should be used for consistency of style. At the moment the style looks more like another website rather than

It uses your default font. Whatever is your usual preference.