Michael Geary wrote: > > From: Chris Ovenden > > I think it's disingenuous to call conditional comments > > "clean, basic HTML". We all want to do beautiful, > > cross-platform, futureproof page layouts using semantic, > > accessible markup; unfortunately user agents are currently > > not quite up to the job (and, much as I love it, I have to > > include Firefox in this). So we hack; or, less pejoratively, we > > work around known issues with the user agents we're given > > - counting our blessings that we live in 2007 and not 1997. > > Whether we hack the CSS, the HTML or a bit of both is a > > matter of personal choice (personally I'm with Barney on > > this) - but call it what it is and don't try to pretend to purity. > > Very insightful! > > At first I was taken aback by the word "disingenuous", until I realized you > probably didn't mean its usual connotation of cynical, calculating, and > insincere. :-) > > It's not surprising that I'd be confused by a word where Dictionary.com > complains: "The meaning of disingenuous has been shifting about lately, as > if people were unsure of its proper meaning..." > > http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=disingenuous > > -Mike (not the language police, just want to make sure no one takes offense > at something you didn't intend) >
Very interesting! I stand corrected in my use of the word, as I didn't mean to imply that david's description of conditional comments was either calcuating, naive or lacking in candour. Lacking in depth or clarity, perhaps; overly-optimistic maybe. Can we just go with "inaccurate"? ;-) -- Chris Ovenden http://thepeer.blogspot.com "Imagine all the people / Sharing all the world" ______________________________________________________________________ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d IE7 information -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=IE7 List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
