>I beg your pardon, how is that different from "f**k" you option? If a
>user is stuck with NS4 and cannot upgrade, for whatever reason it is
>(e.g. public PC farm in school, with no HD write access), the advisory
>doesn't help anything. Do you agree?
Yes. You're correct. I hadn't thought of that, thanks for pointing it
out.
For these users, I would hope that they have other options. It's to
their advantage that you wisely chose to offer a PDF version of all the
docs. I'll say again, we're not excluding them, but they just might
have to tolerate a few glitches. I would also suggest that these
documents are available elsewhere on the net, on sites that aren't so
strict about standards as ours. Can we offer syndication (XML, RSS) for
these other sites.
> > Are there any other options that I haven't considered?
>
>5) using the rewrite trick and supply a different stylesheet. But it
>seems that we will need more than one additional stylesheet and the
>maintenance will be a nightmare.
I agree that this is good option. Very viable and possibly the "holy
grail". If your later statement ("Nobody wants to nurse the site")
applies then there is no maintenance nightmare as far as I can tell.
:-)
>6) fix the problem with NS4. It seems to be a fresh problem.
And invest even more time chasing the bug... Our team has better things
to do I think.
>7) Have you read Allan's fresh IE5 woes? "f**k" IE5 users too?
Surely this isn't a serious argument. We all know that we can get it to
work perfectly in IE 4+, these bugs will be much easier and less
time-consuming to fix than the NS4 issues. Or am I wrong?
>> Don't take this personally Stas, but that's just plain silly. Would
>> you honestly be prepared to forfeit all of the time and effort
>> invested in the new website? As far as I'm concerned, this is an
>> if-all-else-fails only option.
>
>I said I'm just "thinking", I didn't suggest to fallback. So it's not
>silly :)
Aha, the humour of Stas! I didn't think you were serious either, hence
my flippant reply. ;-)
>Nobody wants to nurse the site. We need to get back to coding and we
>don't have a full time webmaster to do this work for us.
>Ideally we want
>to finish the design and forget about evolving for some time
>to come and
>only work on the content. At least this is my vision.
In an ideal world yes. But there is bound to be an initial snagging
list, there always is. That's not to say that the site will be
perpetually "nursed". Alternatively, we could just keep on losing time
with our current course of action.
>> I agree. I also advocated tables. But the developers (too many for
>> me to remember) have done a remarkable job and built a site that
>> doesn't need tables, that works just as well as an table'd site and
>> that's totally standards compliant. They are to be
>congratulated and
>> I for one would be happy to have any of them on my team. But we are
>> now asking them to take that design and get it to work perfectly on
>> NS4. Forgive the crap analogy, but that's like asking Wilbur Wright
>> to fly the Concorde!
>
>We still have a problem with some browsers not supporting CSS.
>Turn off
>CSS and you will see what I mean.
This is a non-issue. We chose this possibility when we elected to go
with 100% standards compliance.
>The current CSS solution seems great, but if you dig deeper it hardly
>keeps its parts together. e.g. I wanted to make the tail
>component to be
>a real tail (coming at the bottom of the page, not at the end of the
>right box)... no way, I've spent a whole day, and it simply won't work
>after I've read the w3c advisory and RFCs 10 times and tried all
>possible tricks. No offense to Allan of course, the browsers simply
>don't follow the standard. even the advanced ones.
Again, we knew this when we made our choices. It's a bit late in the
day for regret don't you think? We know that all the major vendors are
leaning towards compliance these days, with Gecko leading the way. In
time they will all follow suit, commercially they have no choice. But
we chose compliance perhaps prematurely and we now have to face the
consequences.
Jonathan M. Hollin - WYPUG Co-ordinator
West Yorkshire Perl User Group
http://wypug.pm.org/
http://wypug.digital-word.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
