My 2 cents: I think that one of the things you're overlooking when it comes to web design is that, unlike Photoshop graphics or Windows applications, where screen real estate is limited to the size of the resolution, the amount of room that web applications is theoretically limitless because it scrolls by nature. In web design we typically design for vertical scrolling, but it could be horizontal if we wanted it to be. This makes for a very different presentation of content. Tables are a good way of organizing data exactly how you want it. It's not the most efficient way I can think of to do it, but it is much easier (IMHO) than figuring out exact pixel placement.
I think RIAs are coming and in a big way, but standard HTML is going to be here a long time - there's nothing I can think of to replace it and be as easy to use. Matthew Small IT Director Showstopper American Dance Championships [EMAIL PROTECTED] 843-357-1847 -----Original Message----- From: jon hall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 3:26 PM To: CF-Community Subject: Re: IE6 is the new NS4 Tuesday, June 3, 2003, 2:04:42 PM, you wrote: KG> I think the question Erika brings up is do we _need_ css/xhtml/layer KG> based design? Sure they might be nice, but I've built some pretty nice KG> sites without them. Yes, tables are and always were a hack. Tables require that a designer think in grids according to the rules that the different browsers require. Photoshop doesn't make designers do this, neither should the browser. Us coders are pretty good at what we do, but we need to be divorced from the design and empower the designers. It's the whole RIA argument really, MVC etc, just for the design world. KG> Also, I think that some of the reactions may be blown out of proportion KG> based on the original quote. Here's what was said: KG> "As part of the OS, IE will continue to evolve, but there will be no KG> future standalone installations. IE6 SP1 is the final standalone KG> installation.... Legacy OSes have reached their zenith with the addition KG> of IE 6 SP1. Further improvements to IE will require enhancements to the KG> underlying OS." KG> Okay, so where there does it say that IE 6 will not be improved on XP? KG> It doesn't. By my reading, it says that there will be no new development KG> from MS for browsers on 95/98(se)/ME/2000. But XP is not a legacy OS. It KG> is the current OS and it includes IE6 as part of the OS. And I'm willing KG> to bet it will have another Service Pack or two. So when Office 11 comes KG> out with all sorts of XML and MS wants to really leverage it, they'll KG> likely do a XP service pack that improves probably a lot of the features KG> that you list. XP has already been released, and in order to be upgraded to IE7 would require a standalone version of IE, which is not going to happen. I haven't heard about Palladium being extended to XP either which is the official reason MS has given, and with the significant architecture changes necessary for Palladium, I don't see it happening. KG> If everyone switched to Moz, Firebird, or Opera I'd make sure my sites KG> worked with those browsers and use their features. Right now, most of my KG> users use IE so I design primarily for that. (Actually, by our last KG> inventory, 59% of our users have IE5.x. We're doing another inventory KG> soon. Should be interesting to see how that goes.) The majority of people have non-HD TV's right now...doesn't mean things aren't changing and that they aren't on the way out. People developing content for non-hd tv's right now are going to see the value of their content plummet once HD content is demanded by the consumer. The same analogy applies here. I'm willing to bet there are going to be some really killer features in Longhord and IE7...but enough to make every Windows user upgrade? My boss still want's me to develop for NS4...so I don't see how it really makes a difference from my point of view, except slow down the transition to IE7, and I'm already sick of working around IE6 bugs. -- jon mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> -----Original Message----- >> From: jon hall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 12:28 PM >> To: CF-Community >> Subject: Re: IE6 is the new NS4 >> >> >> Sure, IE6 is the most popular browser, all apps have to be >> compatible with it, and are...today. The problem is that it's >> damn buggy even today, holding up the long awaited move from >> table based designs to css based ones, and from html4 to >> xhtml. What about stuff like xforms? Dead in the water. >> >> What features are so despicable? How about what bugs are so >> crippling? I already mentioned the completely fubared box >> model. It's nearly impossible to shoehorn IE6 into >> understanding a css/xhtml/layer based design on a budget. >> Sure there are hacks, my own personal one is putting a >> in front of the doctype, setting IE6 into backwards >> compatible mode and moving forward with the better browsers. >> Anyone else noticed the fact that the IE6 Post SP1 update >> actually introduces not-insignificant rendering changes? They >> actually fixed a well known bug that caused an elements >> detected height to be doubled under certain circumstances and >> didn't tell anyone. So now we have to test for multiple >> versions of IE6 alone in scripts! >> >> Where do I want to go? In a perfect world, people would >> abandon MS, and go with Moz, Opera, and maybe even Safari. In >> reality, Flash is the only option for me as I see it, as I >> want to see progress, and not be stuck on a dead end platform. >> >> -- >> jon >> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> Tuesday, June 3, 2003, 12:48:06 PM, you wrote: >> ELWA> While I agree this may suck ... Do not lose track of >> the fact that >> ELWA> we develop for a world-wide audience and more often than not a >> ELWA> CLIENT or BOSS pays us to do so. And if over half of >> the users on >> ELWA> the planet are using IE6 or some form thereof ... And I >> will still >> ELWA> get paid the same amount of money to make my apps IE6 >> complaint, >> ELWA> then a-developing-for-IE-I-Will-Go. >> >> ELWA> I mean, where do you really want to be? >> ELWA> What are your goals if it is not to build web apps >> usable by the >> ELWA> majority of users in the world? >> >> ELWA> Because fighting the browser war seems to be a bit of a losing >> ELWA> place to me. >> >> ELWA> Sure Opera is great. I like Opera. Our apps work on Opera. They >> ELWA> work in Moz. They even work in Netscape 6 and IE 5 on a >> mac and IE >> ELWA> 6. w00t! >> >> ELWA> What features of IE 6 are so despicable that you can't >> code apps >> ELWA> to work on it? Are those features so life illuminating >> that they >> ELWA> must be used? >> >> ELWA> It musn't be very important if 57% (200,600,563) of 350,808,318 >> ELWA> Visitors during the month of April 2003 to websites running >> ELWA> www.thecounter.com 's counter app use IE6, a number that has >> ELWA> pretty much been the same for a long time. >> >> ELWA> For a full browser line-up for the month of April: >> ELWA> http://www.thecounter.com/stats/2003/April/browser.php >> >> ELWA> But as always to each their own ... :) >> >> >> ELWA> >> KG> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=5 Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
