Why?I, if I may be allowed to use the first person for a while, have an interest in 44th Reconnaissance Regiment but not an all consuming one. Every now and again I return to the subject and find myself going over the same old ground. I'm just not very methodical when it comes to keeping bookmarks of internet sites or taking notes. However I quite enjoy making simple little websites so it seemed if I put one together on 44 Recce that might help my researches. So largely it is for my own benefit, but if it helps you too then so much the better.
Assuming you haven't overriden the styles, or aren't using a browser that otherwise makes things look different to a bog standard one like Internet Explorer, Firefox, Safari or Chrome, you will find text on the site generally looks like this. This is a combination of my choice of a sans-serif font and your default font size.
Sometimes I want to add information that expands upon the main text, perhaps to add background or context. This information may sit awkwardly in the text so I change the text style to make it clear it is something of an aside. This is in a different colour, a serif font, and a proportionally smaller size (but still related to your browser default).
There are occasions where I want to make a comment that is completely out of the flow for example to draw attention to contested facts, or to make a comment that is more to to with the administration of the website (there will be one lower down the page). For example I might want to make a note on copyright. This is again in a different style, basically as described in the previous paragraph but a different colour.
When it comes to referring to army formations it seems there is more than one way to do it. When referring to a replicated battalion I tend to use a form like 1/6th Queen's Royal Regiment (West Surrey) rather than 1st/6th when giving the full name, and then I might have 1/6 Queen's as the short form. Corps are often seen numbered using roman numerals, e.g. X Corps, and that form was certainly used by U.S. forces. However I have seen it suggested, correctly or otherwise, that the British actually preferred to use arabic numerals, e.g. 10th Corps. Similarly for an Army it is suggested the U.S. preferred to spell out the name, e.g. Fifth Army, whereas the British again used arabic numerals, e.g. 8th Army. I have used arabic numerals for British Corps and Armies, except when quoting other sources directly.
Odds and ends
This site was originally written to HTML 4.01 Strict standards with the odd <iframe> associated with advertising meaning I needed to use the HTML 4.01 Transitional DOCTYPE to make my code validate. I couldn't really do much about the third party content turning the pages in to 'tag soup'. I've now converted the site to HTML 5 and again tried to get it to validate as best as I can, although the tags used for the Google Custom Search are a problem. The site is kept technically simple because it doesn't need to be complicated, and artistically clean and simple because I just don't have the artistic bent for it to be otherwise.