PietersenSent: Friday, July 15, 2005 1:41 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: Re: [WSG] Longhorn Avalon - seismic shift for web standards?
But, if you're in the business of building web apps that target a specific platform.. :)
We all do, really.I am at home, and don't have the
research here
work for Microsoft do you David?:)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of David PietersenSent: Friday, July 15, 2005 1:41 PM To:
wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: Re: [WSG] Longhorn Avalon - seismic shift for web standards? But, if you're
On Jul 15, 2005, at 2:54 AM, Paul Ross wrote:
[From a PC mag article]
In a nutshell, Avalon means developers are now free to code without
considering the resolution of users' monitors. This ensures that apps
developed in this environment will work on just about any display,
from mobile phones
My whole point is... why bother?
Why not? As I've written some posts back - most people have no extra
expenses (or extra time / effort) delivering compliant sites, the only
time consuming part is tweaking *for* IE, so I still can't see the point.
It is JUST a browser, heck, you don't even
- seismic shift for web standards? But, if you're in the business of building web apps that target a specific platform.. :)
We all do, really.I am at home, and don't have the
research here, but current statistics show that 97.4% of all devices
accessing web content are running on Windows.Every
of Jeroen Visser|vizi
Sent: Fri 15/07/2005 08:11
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Longhorn Avalon - seismic shift for web standards?
On Jul 15, 2005, at 2:54 AM, Paul Ross wrote:
[From a PC mag article]
In a nutshell, Avalon means developers are now free to code without
considering
David Pietersen wrote:
Sorry, trying to be aware of the request to stay on topic, but...
You shold be more forward-thinking if you're responsilbe for .gov
web site. (No offence, please.)
I never said my site was not compliant. Every page of anything I
serve (apart from the legacy apps)
On 7/15/05, wayne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I dont think XAML needs to be hosted inside IE?
No it doesn't need to be. I said You will be able to, not you must :)
People need to take a step back here and stop the off topic rants. Go
do some light reading or something:
Peter Firminger wrote:
I often limit CMS Administration consoles to IE as I may well use an inline
HTML editor (an Ektron one for example) that invokes a dll on the client.
i thought ms was moving away from the dll.
dwain
--
Dwain Alford
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.alforddesigngroup.com
The
My whole point is... why bother? Why spend the massive amount of
time (and therefore 'the peoples' money) making it work across all
these technologies when practically everyone who is using it has
access to IE.
Given a choice, would you rather drive on a gravel road with a vehicle
using
Dennis Lapcewich wrote:
My whole point is... why bother? Why spend the massive amount of
time (and therefore 'the peoples' money) making it work across all
these technologies when practically everyone who is using it has
access to IE.
Given a choice, would you rather drive on a gravel
On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 14:54:22 -0400, Dennis Lapcewich
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
when practically everyone who is using it has
access to IE
I have this conversation about once a week with a Windoze-centric-IE-only
coworker. My response is always this:
Just because a lot of people have
Dennis,
Your analogy is invalid. More to the point: if 95% of cars had square
rims and steel wheels, would you set up a business making wheels with
round rims taking rubber tyres?
Bob McClelland
Dennis Lapcewich wrote:
My whole point is... why bother? Why spend the massive amount
Isn't it funny that we were having these kinds of discussions about
Netscape in '96? Why design for anything other than Netscape? We are
finally getting standards that aren't tied to a particular browser
implementation/build and we have to ask ourselves whether we want to use
them? Give me
designer wrote:
Dennis,
Your analogy is invalid. More to the point: if 95% of cars had square
rims and steel wheels, would you set up a business making wheels with
round rims taking rubber tyres?
Bob McClelland
as required by industry standards is the key fragment, bob. ie isn't
At least on the open road, the square wheelers would actually _see_ the
error of their ways. You have to wonder what would happen if someone
_physically showed_ that 95% the alternatives...
On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 15:15:13 -0400, designer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Your analogy is invalid.
Hello folks,
I was reading the June 2005 issue of APC (Australian Personal
Computer) magazine which has a cover story on unique features built
into the long-awaited Windows Longhorn OS including the Avalon
presentation system/user interface. This section really got me
thinking:
The most
The most important difference between Avalon and the current Windows
display architecture is that Avalon is vector based. The vector
structure allows scalable graphics (windows, fonts icons), meaning
designers can specify shapes and objects onscreen instead of mapping
elements using pixels and
On 15 Jul 2005, at 9:54 am, Paul Ross wrote:
The most important difference between Avalon and the current Windows
display architecture is that Avalon is vector based. The vector
structure allows scalable graphics (windows, fonts icons), meaning
designers can specify shapes and objects
But, if you're in the business of building web apps that target a specific platform.. :)
We all do, really. I am at home, and don't have the research here, but current statistics show that 97.4% of all devices accessing web content are running on Windows. Every one of these machines has IE
On 15/07/2005, at 11:40 AM, David Pietersen wrote:
But, if you're in the business of building web apps that target a
specific platform.. :)
We all do, really. I am at home, and don't have the research here,
but current statistics show that 97.4% of all devices accessing web
content
hmmmI smell Troll...
You don't work for Microsoft do you David?
:)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Pietersen
Sent: Friday, July 15, 2005 1:41 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Longhorn Avalon - seismic
We all do, really. I am at home, and don't have the research here, but
current statistics show that 97.4% of all devices accessing web content
are running on Windows. Every one of these machines has IE on it.
Really, are we mad to develop for anything else? Discuss.
Bluntly, if you
Really, are we mad to develop for anything else?
Um, yes?
Bridges are also built for conditions that don't occur most of the year.
I mean - you should not 'develop' for a platform, but in compliance with
some guidelines and compatibility in mind.
--
Jan Brasna aka JohnyB ::
: Friday, July 15, 2005 1:41 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Longhorn Avalon - seismic shift for web standards?
But, if you're in the business of building web apps that target a specific
platform.. :)
We all do, really. I am at home, and don't have the research
PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of David PietersenSent: Friday, July 15, 2005 1:41 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: Re: [WSG] Longhorn Avalon - seismic shift for web standards? But, if you're in the business of building web apps that target a specific platform.. :)
We all do, really.I am at home
Now cut that out (smile or no smile)!
I use Windows machines exclusively and prefer to browse using IE as that's
what my main audience uses. I pick up many things that Russ on his non
Win/IE combination misses (not that he doesn't check but they are not his
defaults and things do slip through).
On 7/15/05, David Pietersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We all do, really. I am at home, and don't have the research here, but
current statistics show that 97.4% of all devices accessing web content are
running on Windows. Every one of these machines has IE on it. Really, are
we mad to
I work for the Government.
So, that's sad. You shlould have DDA/WCAG in mind. Accessible page must
be universal as far as posible.
30,000 unique visitors a day, and the number of those using a
non-windows OS is not even worth counting.
I love Firefox, but playing Devil's advocate, how
We all do, really. I am at home, and don't have the research here,
but current statistics show that 97.4% of all devices accessing web
content are running on Windows. Every one of these machines has IE
on it. Really, are we mad to develop for anything else? Discuss.
I realise you said
I dont think XAML needs to be hosted inside IE?
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Justin Carter
Sent: Fri 15/07/2005 02:19
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Longhorn Avalon - seismic shift for web standards?
I dont think Avalon and XAML
31 matches
Mail list logo
