Hi Ben, > > These days I hide all styles from Netscape, and my sanity > > level has risen considerably since I started doing it - then > > again, I don't use tables for layout any more either, so > > Netscape users still get a logical (albeit plain) layout. > > Jon, do you mind if I ask what you mean by "hide all styles from > Netscape" ?? do you mean you don't reference any CSS if you're > displaying in NS4.x?
Spot on. I am assuming (please correct me if I'm wrong, anyone) that a Netscape 4 user would rather have an unstyled but useful page - e.g. proper use of headings, paragraphs, lists etc - than a page that's illegible or positioned badly or just plain ugly because Netscape can't handle its clever CSS. > Also, I'm still using tables for layout and I don't really have > any issues. I presume you're using CSS and absolute-positioning? Yup, but I can get away with it - I know exactly which browsers are in use on my systems (don't forget I do internal apps, not public websites) I use it for the purely selfish reason that it's easier for me to maintain than a bunch of nested tables :-) > is this commonplace now? I very much doubt it, just because it's not as "safe" as tables. Even amongst those who have made the change from tables to CSS, I'd still expect the majority to be bloggers, web design studios, and similar techies. The only high-profile CSS-P site I can think of off the top of my head is www.wired.com - Lycos stopped using tables a little while back, but it seems to me that all they did was a search and replace from <td> to <div> :-( Cheers Jon ____ • The WDVL Discussion List from WDVL.COM • ____ To Join wdvltalk, Send An Email To: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Send Your Posts To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change subscription settings to the wdvltalk digest version: http://wdvl.internet.com/WDVL/Forum/#sub ________________ http://www.wdvl.com _______________________ You are currently subscribed to wdvltalk as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
