Does this look right?

[Wassercrats]

Here are two designs I've been considering. I've pretty much chosen the bottom one, but it's theoretically possible for someone to change my mind. In the bottom one, you see those light green lines on the top and side of each side menu? Does it look right that the line on the side is to the left in the left column but it's to the right in the right column?

http://www.polisource.com/images/Polisource_style_compare.gif

[Buck]

What's got me stumped is why the bottom one has the mirror-image on the left, under the top "Editor's Dek." I would always read from the left-hand column, but it's backwards!

I think the lines are right since it is a mirror-image.

I like the top one better, I like the fact that each section is divided by the green background, it seems easier on my eyes to quickly locate the sections at a glance.

[Wassercrats]

I did it in MS Paint with copying, pasting, and flipping. It's easier to experiment that way than by creating actual web pages. All the text will be readable left to right in the actual webpage.

The top one looks better here than in my full sized version. In the full sized version, the very light yellowish background in the top and side menus is more pronounced and it doesn't look as "serious" as it does above, but with a white background it looks like it needs color. It may be fixable with color tweaks or something, but the bottom design has the added benefit of utilizing an extra design element that's used in some subpages, such as this (http://www.polisource.com/consumer-protection.shtml) one (the light green top and side lines).

My website has to impress a federal court judge, so simple dignity is better than something a little too flashy.

[Jeff]

The thing I don't like about the top one is that it looks more like an off-the-shelf portal solution with the side "floating" menus and the main content area (ala vbadvanced, vbportal, phpnuke, etc.) so while it looks slick and I like the content division, to my eye the bottom one looks a bit more professional for the site at hand.

[Wassercrats]

Yeah, that's what I'm thinking. Yet the one on the bottom may be missing something. I'm currently looking for some "S" shaped separators for the sides of the center menu.

[Andilinks]

I'll go with the one on the bottom as well...

As someone who visits lots of sites I've noticed that there are trends in design oscillating between squared off and rounded. Most of the newer Web 2.0 sites are squared off though recently they were rounded. These fashion cycles are getting shorter. It is probably is the template makers that are driving this as Jeff has mentioned.

Your example on the bottom has both but is more current. :)

[Wassercrats]

Ok, so I'll use the bottom one. I don't know whether I want to take the time to actually create a working A-Z index right now, so I have to choose between a "coming soon" message and leaving out the A-Z menu which could make the green menu bar below it look worthless.

[Jeff]

Don't do the "coming soon" -- if you do, you almost guarantee you'll never get to completing it :P

Coming soon, like "this page under construction" seems dated.

[Wassercrats]

Don't do the "coming soon" -- if you do, you almost guarantee you'll never get to completing it :PYeah, I had a coming soon message for a search feature for years and never created it. This time I'm just leaving out the feature without saying anything.

The new browsers still don't render valid HTML identically. Not even close, at least in my case. I have to use Javascript to select the style sheet to use. I think I'll have to add one for IE/Mac. And maybe I'll make it look better when Javascript is off. After so many years of development of browsers and HTML this stuff should be more consistent. Maybe after 20 years they'll get it right.