Update About LJ
So after talking to someone more advanced, the conclusion is this... LJ broke it. The reason they broke it is because they are still making changes and they are changing the coding. This means my quick fix, got broken. Really this isn't anyones fault because I came to LJ and saw the change and said... icky colors. So I made a fix that wasn't going to last once the coding got change... so maybe a group effort.
Now part of the reason they are still working is to perfect their changes and to clear out any bugs they are working on. Totally makes sense.
I get this as I've worked with mini-updates to websites and you sometimes have to do things in stages.
But I also was told that many of the old layouts will make things look odd. And after checking out the old style.... honestly I'm happy with the new. I know many aren't but the old is just that. I'm all for improvement and most of what LJ has done, hasn't been so bad.
I feel the functionality is still there though I'd like the LJ Nav Menu to be a little less in height. More sleek.
I like when your window shrinks that the COMMUNITY NAV MENU is responsive but it doesn't appear the LJ NAV MENU is but I also haven't been to LJ on a Phone or Tablet. I'm guessing they will work on that.
I know many didn't like the 3 Bar menu button though that is the most common way to shrink a menu in a responsive system.
What I like about the improvements is all the clear information about the Community I'm currenly in and that the bar is the same no matter what part of LJ I'm on.
However, it would be nice if this menu was something that didn't HAVE to be present on every journal.
Now we just need to get LJ to clear out the bugs and I think LJ will work like a dream....
If you are experiencing a bug: REPORT IT.
But I'm really interested to know what you all dislike about the new NAV MENU verses the old? Please be respectible when commenting. Remember I'm not LJ so curses and rants won't get us anywhere. Tell me functionally what you don't appreciate.
Click below to spread the conversation: