Thierry Koblentz said:
>"Stealing" time from IE6 dev time to tune styles sheets for browsers that
>represent a very small fraction of your audience is no better than spending
>time on making rounded corner, drop shadow, etc. work in IE6.
>I think the key is to *balance* these two approaches.
Yes
> I donknow if you read "Transcending CSS" or not, but this is basically
> the same thing Andy was saying in his book. Perfectly usable is the
> same
> as "punishing"? I disagree with that conclusion.
No, I did not read "Transcending CSS", but my understanding of this from
your posts is that autho
Thierry Koblentz said:
>I'm not for serving pixel perfect designs - or even identical look - across
>browsers, but I'm not for "punishing" IE6 users either.
>I'm sorry, but this makes no sense to me...
To quote Georg: "It leaves older IE/win versions with a perfectly usable
document, and doesn't
Thierry Koblentz wrote:
[snip]
>> Ok, I see. He want IE6- to render a page like it antiquated or ugly. I
>> totally agree but this has to be a top down banishment of IE6-. The
>> governments and the corporations of this world have to inform the
>> masses (by whatever medium) that there are 100s of
> >> You can still support IE6- but some authors just don't want to
> bother
> >> understanding why IE6- has shocking CSS2.1 support or why a document
> >> is rendered broken in IE6-. I agree with Andy Clarke by sending
> >> IE6/Win un-styled pages but their is also that user agent IE5/Mac.
> >
> >
Jeff Zeitlin wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Mar 2010 18:19:08 +1100, Alan Gresley
> wrote:
>
>> You can still support IE6- but some authors just don't want to bother
>> understanding why IE6- has shocking CSS2.1 support or why a document
>> is rendered broken in IE6-. I agree with Andy Clarke by sending
>
> I have a grid of all the CSS3 selectors and browser support on my blog
> at
> http://www.standardista.com/css3/css3-selector-browser-support
>
> The values and properties are on my old blog at
> http://www.evotech.net/blog/2010/02/css3-properties-values-browser-
> support/
> this is a huge file
I have a grid of all the CSS3 selectors and browser support on my blog at
http://www.standardista.com/css3/css3-selector-browser-support
The values and properties are on my old blog at
http://www.evotech.net/blog/2010/02/css3-properties-values-browser-support/
this is a huge file, so it may take
At 19:40 -0500 on 03/07/2010, Freelance Traveller wrote about Re:
[css-d] "Transcendant" web design and CSS3:
>Thank you; this does indeed appear to be quite useful - and tells me
>that CSS3 is not ready for prime time, and probably should not yet be
>used as I'd lik
On 3/7/10 5:32 PM, Theresa Mesa wrote:
> Plus, I don't think the vast majority of website owners are going to
> permit the charges for the kind of time this would take, so while it
> would be worthwhile to try on one's own site, it's probably not best
> to effect this across all your sites in progr
On Mon, 8 Mar 2010 18:19:08 +1100, Alan Gresley
wrote:
>You can still support IE6- but some authors just don't want to bother
>understanding why IE6- has shocking CSS2.1 support or why a document
>is rendered broken in IE6-. I agree with Andy Clarke by sending
>IE6/Win un-styled pages but thei
2010/3/8 Jeff Zeitlin :
> On Mon, 8 Mar 2010 09:11:25 +0900, Philippe Wittenbergh
> wrote:
...
>>> He also advocates NOT trying to make
>>> the presentation of a website look the same in all browsers, but to
>>> write to the limit of the CSS capabilities of each individual browser,
>>> and use thi
Freelance Traveller wrote:
> On Sun, 7 Mar 2010 15:49:43 -0800, Thierry Koblentz
> wrote:
>
> [Quoting me in >>]
>
>>> Question the first: Is this a widely-accepted philosophy in the
>>> web-design community, and is it being widely adopted - and should it
>>> be?
>
>> I think this is the right
Theresa Mesa wrote:
> Plus, I don't think the vast majority of website owners are going to
> permit the charges for the kind of time this would take, so while it
> would be worthwhile to try on one's own site, it's probably not best
> to effect this across all your sites in progress.
>
> The
Plus, I don't think the vast majority of website owners are going to
permit the charges for the kind of time this would take, so while it
would be worthwhile to try on one's own site, it's probably not best
to effect this across all your sites in progress.
Theresa
On Mar 7, 2010, at 4:40
On Mon, 8 Mar 2010 09:11:25 +0900, Philippe Wittenbergh
wrote:
>On Mar 8, 2010, at 8:21 AM, Jeff Zeitlin wrote:
>> Mr Clarke is pushing CSS3 in this book, though he notes that (at the
>> time the book was written) support for CSS3 was spotty at best even for
>> the Mac (his preferred platform).
On Sun, 7 Mar 2010 15:49:43 -0800, Thierry Koblentz
wrote:
[Quoting me in >>]
>> Question the first: Is this a widely-accepted philosophy in the
>> web-design community, and is it being widely adopted - and should it
>> be?
>I think this is the right approach, but note that most of the time the
On Mar 8, 2010, at 8:21 AM, Jeff Zeitlin wrote:
> Mr Clarke is pushing CSS3 in this book, though he notes that (at the
> time the book was written) support for CSS3 was spotty at best even for
> the Mac (his preferred platform).
Note that CSS3 as a unit doesn't exist. 'CSS3' is a collection of m
> I recently acquired a copy of /Transcending CSS: The Fine Art of Web
> Design/ by Andy Clarke (New Riders, 2007: ISBN 0-321-41097-1).
>
> Mr Clarke is pushing CSS3 in this book, though he notes that (at the
> time the book was written) support for CSS3 was spotty at best even for
> the Mac (his
19 matches
Mail list logo
