Hi Sandy: I've seen the various css layout sites (http://www.csszengarden.com/ being one of my favorites), and they're all great to show what could be done...but IMO it's still not practical to try and develop a full site using only CSS for layout.
My original point was to adhere to standards as opposed to exhausting resources in accomodating browsers that don't. While it's certainly better in theory to separate content from display using css, using tables for layout is still valid (i believe...I'm sure I'll be corrected if I'm wrong tho <g>). When you say "when using web standards, you have to be designing for web standard compatible browsers", I'm curious as to what qualifies a browser as "web standard compatible". Many people would likely say IE 5.5+ and NS6+...but I would tend to disagree, only because of the fact that I've seen IE 5.5 and IE 6 render css differently (different enough to blow up an otherwise decent layout). I'm all for browsers being "web standard compatible"...but when classifying a browser as such, there can be no leeway. Either it supports the standards or not. Kind of supporting the standards is like kind of being a little bit pregnant. charlie ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sandy Clark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2003 12:09 PM Subject: RE: Crossborwser support WAS: Simple html question > Try these sites for some good css/layouts. > > > http://glish.com/css/ > http://www.bluerobot.com/web/layouts/ > http://realworldstyle.com/ > http://www.fu2k.org/alex/css/layouts/3Col_OrderedAbsolute.mhtml > > Keep in mind though that when using web standards, you have to be designing > for web standard compatible browsers. You have to throw out the idea that a > design will look exactly the same in all browsers, on all computers, on all > os's and in all versions. Its not possible and will drive you crazy. At > best, allow your sites to degrade so that while it might not be pretty, the > content will still be there. My site, http://www.shayna.com, is readable in > NS 4, but not pretty. And that's fine. > > Also if you are using Fusebox4, you can use contentvariables to stuff > display stuff in andthen output it to a particular layout (either css or > tables) depending on the browser you sniff (I send to web standards by > default and table for NS4 only on some stuff I do). > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ian Skinner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2003 1:53 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Crossborwser support WAS: Simple html question > > > You bring up something that I have debated in my head many times. How can > anybody bring about better browser compliance so that it is easier to make > good clean and accessible web pages. > > I have been working on a project for the last 6 months, and I'm finding that > I'm having to fall back on age old tricks and kludges to get the pages to > work similar. I'm still using tables for layout because I can't get > divisions to do what I need them to do. Which is basically > multi-column/cell layout. For example, I wanted something fairly simple > such as this. I needed two divisions at the bottom of a larger division so > that I could have images with captions side by side. I never did figure out > how to do this in such a way that it worked properly. > > | | > |____________| > || | | > ||image|image| > ||text | | > |------------| > | | > -------------- > > I really like the idea of CSS and universally standard rendering of designs > so that I can make clean pages, but I'm not sure we're there yet. In my > darkest hours, I wonder if we are even moving that direction! > > > Ian Skinner > Web Programmer > BloodSource > Sacramento, CA > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Charlie Griefer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2003 10:09 AM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: Simple html question > > > Well, the 'big question' may not be that big to everybody :) > > Yes, it works in NS. Will it work in NS 4.x? I don't know. > > Personally, I don't worry about NS 4.x anymore. In my opinion, the number > of users with NS 4.x is an acceptable level of loss. I can't spend > resources on making sure a page will render properly for a browser that > represents such a small % of my audience. To me, that time spent would be a > greater loss. > > This might not be the most popular stance...but given the limited resources > that I do have to work with, my feeling is that if my code is > standards-compliant (by current standards), then I've done my job. Also > (and I'm sure this is a very naive belief), I feel that the more we, as Web > Developers, cater to each and every browser (if i do *this* then it will > work correctly in that browser...and add a condition here to make sure it > works in *that* browser), then we give the browser companies no motivation > to ensure that their products will render code 'properly'. > > I know that digresses a bit from the original comment (dealing with older > browsers)...but I'm curious to know if others feel this way...and if so, do > you act on it? Or are you in a position where you don't have the option (or > desire) to discount any certain browser(s)? > > As this isn't directly related to CF, hope it's not considered off-topic. > Seems that since we all develop for the Web, it would be relevant. > > Charlie > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bryan Stevenson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2003 10:02 AM > Subject: Re: Simple html question > > > > and the big question...does it work in Nutscrape and if so...how far back? > > version 4.x? ;-) > > > > Bryan Stevenson B.Comm. > > VP & Director of E-Commerce Development > > Electric Edge Systems Group Inc. > > t. 250.920.8830 > > e. [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > --------------------------------------------------------- > > Macromedia Associate Partner > > www.macromedia.com > > --------------------------------------------------------- > > Vancouver Island ColdFusion Users Group > > Founder & Director > > www.cfug-vancouverisland.com > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Andre Mohamed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2003 9:47 AM > > Subject: RE: Simple html question > > > > > > > You can't get smaller than 1 pixel thickness (unless you consider > > > dotted/dashed borders) > > > > > > <table style="border:1px solid black"> > > > <tr> > > > <td>hello world</td> > > > </tr> > > > </table> > > > > > > That's as thin as you can get (it definitely doesn't look the same the > > > default border - though that depends on your browser) > > > > > > André > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: John McCosker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: 12 August 2003 17:36 > > > To: CF-Talk > > > Subject: Simple html question > > > > > > Hi, > > > Just a very simple question, > > > is it possible to apply a style to a <table> to manipulate its border, > > > border="1" is just a tab to thick for the fine layout our designer has > > > done. > > > > > > I tried <table style="border:1px;border-color:#000000">, but this just > > > gives > > > the default border of one. > > > > > > Can't seem to find anything in the style editor shipped with CF studio > > > 4.5, > > > > > > Respectfully, > > > > > > j. > > > > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.cfhosting.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
