LOL :-) Gotta love that Parthian shot...
I agree it's pointless going on, so we should agree to disagree. However,
I'd like to point out that the web sites I referred to in my previous post
do not necessarily reflect my point of view - and indeed they are probably
contradictory to each other. I felt they were relevant to the debate,
though.
Anyway, 'nuff distractions, back to the real work...
Regards
Colin M Sharples
I/T Architect
IBM Global Services New Zealand
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
phone: 64-4-5769853
mobile: 64-21-402085
fax: 64-4-5765616
Arron Bates
<arron@keyboardm To: Struts Developers List
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
onkey.com> cc:
Subject: Re: Freetext attribute for all
tags...
13/12/2001 13:03
Please respond
to "Struts
Developers List"
(I do apologise for this post. It should stop. But for some reason I
just can't handle misrepresentation of trying to get markup to work in
the largest amount of browsers possible (both those inside and outside
the spec). So, if you don't want to hear a rant in reply to a rant, read
another email...)
Actually Colin,
Both your points are misplaced, and you're trying to become a champion
of "correctness" and I find it arrogant and ignorant that you're trying
to publish that the need to create a page that works on *more* browsers
is "incorrect".
As for your points...
1) I don't discriminate. In fact... this is all about going the extra
step to make sure I *don't* discriminate. And that includes older
browsers. You're talking in terms of *only* using non-standard
attributes, where in reality they're actually used along side. If a
browser doesn't support them, their presence doesn't effect them. So
"marginwidth" works great in IE & NS6, but NS4 will ignore it. I use
also "leftmargin" & "rightmargin" in the same tag and NS4 will use them
and IE & NS6 will ignore them. Result, a page that works in all 4+
browsers, and discriminates nobody.
2) It's not about being "browser-specific". As above, it's about
including specific attributes amongst standard ones. Not "just using the
specific ones".
So considering all this... the pages I markup work on more browsers than
the ones you do, because I'm not bound by the spec. This means... I have
a potentially larger user base. Take this little piece of information to
a potential client/employer... What's reality?...
I am so over this conversation.
Arron.
* Does a bandwagon go faster if it's painted red?...
Colin Sharples wrote:
>One last comment on this - have a look at the following sites:
>
>http://www.anybrowser.org/campaign/
>
>http://www.webstandards.org/upgrade/
>
>which present two other sides to the story:
>
>1) by using browser-specific code you actively discriminate against those
>who have no option but to use something other than NS or IE (e.g. blind
>people who need a text-based browser).
>
>2) the recent versions of most browsers, including the big 2, support all
>the relevant standards anyway, so there's simply no need to be
>browser-specific.
>
>That's reality for ya...
>
>Regards
>
>Colin M Sharples
>I/T Architect
>IBM Global Services New Zealand
>
>email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>phone: 64-4-5769853
>mobile: 64-21-402085
>fax: 64-4-5765616
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
