Re: [WSG] IE9's Browser Mode Controls - Reliable?
This way of switching browser modes (between 7, 8 and 9) is quite convenient but... is it a true representation of how the project will render in these three browsers? From what I've read about them, they are close emulations rather than true representations (that is, IE is applying a set of rendering rules but not firing up genuine IE7/8 instances). Given the convenience factor though, I tend to use the modes for quick testing and only fire up VMs for a final test or if a specific bug has been raised. If not, I'd love to get some suggestions on the LEAST INVASIVE way to test different modern flavors of IE. I'm yet to find any option that's ultimately more reliable than VMs. I don't trust multi-IE solutions ever since I tried one that installed an entirely-unsecure, unpatched IE6 instance that was sandboxed away from all security measures (the results were predictable from that point). On Win7 I use XP Mode with differencing to set up multiple versions. The images don't expire so it's a one-off setup rather than re-downloading Microsoft's test VMs. I've written up my experiences at http://weblog.200ok.com.au/2010/08/browser-testing-with-windows-7-xp-mode.html On Mac I've just tried using https://github.com/xdissent/ievms and other than being a very very long download it worked without incident. I'd suggest installing one version at a time when you won't be disconnecting for a while :) cheers, Ben -- --- http://weblog.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
[WSG] Out of Office
Hi There Please be advised that I am currently out of the office on vacation until October 10 2011. Should you have an urgent support query please email our support team at supp...@jx2.com.au For general information queries please email i...@jx2.com.au Alternatively I will be able to get back to you upon my return to the office. Best Regards *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
[WSG] media queries: device-width vs max/min width
I would love to hear what other think about the approach for device-width vs max/min width. For myself, I have done a couple sites targeting device-width and really think this is better approach. The hype about responsive design got me to try out the max/min width approach, I find that I need to tackle more the the window resizes (and this means writing more CSS rules means penalizing touchscreen device user), and the experience can be quite awful seeing it from desktop browser. I'm sort of in a defeated mood right now, really feel that except the ego to show off, I'm unable to find a convincing reason that desktop user needs to be given a responsive website anything smaller than 800px. tee *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] media queries: device-width vs max/min width
Tee, I agree with your thinking regarding a desktop user getting the 320px wide layout. It can seem silly. At the same time, responsive design isn't supposed to be something visible but something invisible. I doubt desktop users are ever resizing their browser windows and gasping in astonishment when the layout conforms. Table and fluid layouts have been doing this always and no one has ever cared then either as a user. Responsive developers are the only ones scaling the browser in and out and checking the results. Yeah, there are a bunch of items that are frustrating with responsive design - especially if your fighting to get an element to change from one layout to another with out weirdness. I've only made one responsive site so far and I had to really dumb it down to get used to the work method itself, the order I should be doing things, trying to gear for mobile first. I'm in the midst of a ton of experimentation. Here's the site so far if my own code can help you at all: http://jacque.sitesbyjoe.com I wouldn't user this building method on a client site unless they specifically wanted it at this point or until I figure out some more tricks to working this way. Would I offer it? Heck yes. I want to master the style and I'm sure you do too. Keep at it. *Joseph R. B. Taylor* /Web Designer/Developer/ -- Sites by Joe /Clean, Simple and Elegant Web Design/ Web: http://sitesbyjoe.com Phone: (508) 840-9657 Email: j...@sitesbyjoe.com On 9/25/11 5:38 PM, tee wrote: I would love to hear what other think about the approach for device-width vs max/min width. For myself, I have done a couple sites targeting device-width and really think this is better approach. The hype about responsive design got me to try out the max/min width approach, I find that I need to tackle more the the window resizes (and this means writing more CSS rules means penalizing touchscreen device user), and the experience can be quite awful seeing it from desktop browser. I'm sort of in a defeated mood right now, really feel that except the ego to show off, I'm unable to find a convincing reason that desktop user needs to be given a responsive website anything smaller than 800px. tee *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] media queries: device-width vs max/min width
Did you know that only 50% of users actually have their browser windows at full maximum width. The other 50% don't actually have it at full width. So the idea of having max/min allows us developers to create custom widths with different window sizes even if someone like myself who is on a 1440 x 900 resolution but have my browser size at 1142 x 721. So I would actually see a smaller version of the design than a maximum screen resolution. This gives us a greater control over the layout. It can be daunting and difficult at first to develop in this environment. The screen resolution can be a headache with so many sizes to think about especially if you are building for mobiles in mind. The biggest problem is testing I find getting hold of devices to test on to be difficult, as we already have issues getting hold of older browsers. As Joseph mentioned users won't necessary be scaling their browsers up and down to see the results but more so when they aren't actually seeing things at full width they will evidently see a smaller slim down version if they were to increase their browser window they should see a change in layout if you have set the min/max width. So there is a small chance of users flexing their browser windows at times. One major draw back if any of you have noticed is when you *zoom in*. Have you noticed using media queries with min/max width when you zoom in the layout changes as the browser thinks your resolution has changed which alters the layout. I for one find this a limitation and annoying especially for users wanting to zoom into a specific section or want to enlarge font size this really hurts in terms of accessibility. This is another jumping stone for us web developers with new technology seems to come with more complexity and more constraints to think about. I am excited about this and it will take time to fully master this new feature. I have no doubt that within the next year or two majority of sites will conform to this new responsive approach. Steven Wu Freelance Web Developer +44 (0)7540599163 Skype: cyberpunkstudio www.designtodevelop.com On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 11:20 PM, Joseph Taylor j...@sitesbyjoe.com wrote: ** Tee, I agree with your thinking regarding a desktop user getting the 320px wide layout. It can seem silly. At the same time, responsive design isn't supposed to be something visible but something invisible. I doubt desktop users are ever resizing their browser windows and gasping in astonishment when the layout conforms. Table and fluid layouts have been doing this always and no one has ever cared then either as a user. Responsive developers are the only ones scaling the browser in and out and checking the results. Yeah, there are a bunch of items that are frustrating with responsive design - especially if your fighting to get an element to change from one layout to another with out weirdness. I've only made one responsive site so far and I had to really dumb it down to get used to the work method itself, the order I should be doing things, trying to gear for mobile first. I'm in the midst of a ton of experimentation. Here's the site so far if my own code can help you at all: http://jacque.sitesbyjoe.com I wouldn't user this building method on a client site unless they specifically wanted it at this point or until I figure out some more tricks to working this way. Would I offer it? Heck yes. I want to master the style and I'm sure you do too. Keep at it. *Joseph R. B. Taylor* *Web Designer/Developer* -- Sites by Joe *Clean, Simple and Elegant Web Design* Web: http://sitesbyjoe.com Phone: (508) 840-9657 Email: j...@sitesbyjoe.com On 9/25/11 5:38 PM, tee wrote: I would love to hear what other think about the approach for device-width vs max/min width. For myself, I have done a couple sites targeting device-width and really think this is better approach. The hype about responsive design got me to try out the max/min width approach, I find that I need to tackle more the the window resizes (and this means writing more CSS rules means penalizing touchscreen device user), and the experience can be quite awful seeing it from desktop browser. I'm sort of in a defeated mood right now, really feel that except the ego to show off, I'm unable to find a convincing reason that desktop user needs to be given a responsive website anything smaller than 800px. tee *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help:
Re: [WSG] media queries: device-width vs max/min width
On 9/25/11 5:38 PM, tee wrote: I would love to hear what other think about the approach for device-width vs max/min width. tee The approach to responsive web design is not particularly difficult. Your castle in the air needs a simple and solid foundation. That's the key. The one-size fits all concept is an exercise in futility. What works for layout A will not necessarily work for layout B. And either way, putting up a page or test page will buy you a lot more than writing about it... Best, ~d -- Desktop. Laptop. Tablet. Mobile! http://chelseacreekstudio.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
[WSG] SOLVED: IE7 Issues - The Final Three
Hello All - Just a quick note of thanks to all of you who responded to my IE7 questions. Two of my three issues have now been solved due to your guidance and suggestions. The only holdout is the weird misalignment of the LI and Input buttons but that's not such a big deal... will probably just re-code those pages with two input buttons. This is a FANTASTIC list of WONDERFUL people to which I am most grateful! Cole -Original Message- From: li...@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:li...@webstandardsgroup.org] On Behalf Of Kepler Gelotte Sent: Sunday, September 25, 2011 5:46 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG] IE7 Issues - The Final Three Z-INDEX OF POSITIONED HR You could fix this by putting the gecko image after the hr and positioning the gecko absolutely: HTML: !-- CONTENT: MAIN -- div id=content_main hr img id=wildlife class=gekoLower src=./Sangat_files/geko.png width=278 height=173 alt=Sangat Wildlife: Tropical Geko h1Welcome to Our World/h1 CSS: #wildlife.gekoLower { position: absolute; top: -30px; left: -250px; } POSITIONED WRAPPER EFFECT, COPYRIGHT LINE AND FOOTER NAV To fix this, you could clear the main content before bottomEffect and have bottomEffect be position relative: HTML: /div div class=clearnbsp;/div div id=bottomEffectnbsp;/div !-- NAVIGATION/FOOTER: -- CSS: #bottomEffect { width: 780px; position: relative; left: 0; bottom: -10px; height: 10px; background: #2A2B2D url(../image/public/.global/body_bottom.jpg) no-repeat 0 0; padding-bottom: 10px; } I'm not sure what is causing the two buttons not to line up. Could you switch them to both be either links or submit buttons? Hope that helps. Best regards, Kepler Gelotte Neighbor Webmaster, Inc. 156 Normandy Dr., Piscataway, NJ 08854 www.neighborwebmaster.com phone/fax: (732) 302-0904 *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***