Its funny, you are looking only at the blog, if you go to my site
(http://www.shayna.com), you will note that it is ENTIRELY standards based,
no hacks and I do tell people that if it looks funny, they need to get a
standards based browser.
In the meantime, in order to work with what we have, compromises need to be
made right now, but If I code 70-80% of my site to standards now I am doing
a heck of a lot more to raise the bar than most people out there.
Even IE's box model isn't so bad if you use a proper doctype. For good or
bad, most browsers have standardized on using the doctype to decide what
type of rendering they will do (standards or quirks). However, most people
either aren't aware of this or don't care and the default for all the
browsers is quirks mode.
If you guys think my credibility is an issue by using a css hack then I will
gladly rework those items to be standards compliant. You are my audience
and my peers and I want to make sure I do the right thing.
_____
From: Charlie Griefer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2003 2:26 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: css, xhtml, standards, bandersnatch, etc...
Hi Sandy:
Couple of points...
First off, I agree whole-heartedly that coding for standards is in every
coder/programmer's best interests. As long as we collectively continue to
jump through hoops to get our sites to render in non-standards compliant
browsers, we offer the browser manufacturers no incentives to adhere to
standards themselves. We've already established a precedent that we'll
write conditional after conditional and redirection after redirection to
accomodate them.
It definitely is liberating to be able to say, "I code to an accepted
standard. If your browser doesn't view it properly, it's the browser's
fault". Of course, not everybody can say that. Many are bound to make
their sites accessible to as many browsers as possible and that
unfortunately means having to continue the hoops-jumping-thru.
Now I would like to vent about CSS...I've tried lately to move away from the
table-based layouts in favor of css based layouts (which you seem to be a
staunch advocate of). But doesn't CSS, at this point in time, suffer from
the same problems of having to do "browser-sniffing"? Even on your
blog...you used the rounded box corners courtesy of cssvault. Well, doesn't
that style have an explicit 'condition' (for lack of a better term) to
address a specific browser? My latest attempt at a table-less layout is at
http://130.13.124.245:6699/comix/titles.cfm I built it while testing in IE
5.5/6 (yes, yes, i know...). It looks...horribly bad in some other
browsers. I understand this to be due to IE's improper rendering of the box
model.
So one of the more prominent browsers out there (really, the most prominent
browser) misinterprets the padding/margins on a div/span. So once again, we
(coders/programmers) are forced to employ 'hacks' to accomodate different
browsers.
Bottom line is that I'm all for adhering to standards. I'm all for writing
code that is faster/more efficient/more portable. But the one big question
that I guess lingers in my mind is... "are we there yet?"
After a few unsuccessful attempts at table-less layouts, I say no. Curious
as to what opinions others have (in spite of what practices they may
employ).
Charlie
----- Original Message -----
From: Sandy Clark
To: CF-Community
Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2003 12:00 PM
Subject: RE: css, xhtml, standards, bandersnatch, etc...
While its frustrating that some of the items promoted in the standards are
not in any browser, blame the browser makers, not the standards
organizations.
I'm a tyrant on this subject (ask my co-workers), but being able to write
HTML and CSS that complies with some sort of standard, makes my life
easier.
I'm not having to write a hack for every browser out there and having to
re-write when a new browser comes on the market.
If we all promote and use web standards, and use browsers which follow the
standards, then there will be incentives for the browser makers to
implemnet
the standards in their web sites. If we don't and use what's out there,
then where is the incentive?
_____
From: Kevin Graeme [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2003 1:25 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: css, xhtml, standards, bandersnatch, etc...
So with the semi-OT talk of standards over on cf-talk, it coincides with
something I've been thinking and some frustrations I've been having.
Standards don't exist.
They are a frumious Bandersnatch. We can write the words and they can even
have some kind of meaning to people, but they either don't seem to have
the
same meaning to everyone or they simply only exist as words and will never
be seen in reality.
Dave's quote was excellent and worth repeating I think:
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress
depends on the unreasonable man." - George Bernard Shaw
A current CSS frustration:
display: table-column-group
I really need that for a project I'm working on. I need the ability to
control the display of a column in a table. Yes I can kludge around it,
but
it's not pretty. So what browsers support this CSS2 declaration that was
ratified over 5 years ago? None. It's a standard that doesn't exist. It's
my
frumious Bandersnatch.
-Kevin
_____
_____
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
