RE: [WSG] Standard Hacks?

2004-06-09 Thread Kay Smoljak
Would it be beneficial to come up with a list of Standard Hacks :-) I think the idea is that you should stay away from hacks as much as possible. One exception is the box model hack for IE5 and IE5.5 - but there are a couple of different ways of doing that one, and which one you pick depends on

Re: [WSG] Standard Hacks?

2004-06-09 Thread Chris Stratford
John, It is always best to avoid any sort of hack. There is always a way around a hack, if that be by adding an extra div. or changing your menu layout. Hacks are *last resort* methods to create a layout. I think a list of _standard hacks_ would just promote the use of hacks, where they are

RE: [WSG] Standard Hacks?

2004-06-09 Thread Chris Blown
That is true, however already knowing of such hacks enables you to make this kind of judgement. So for the purpose of education these should help you out John http://diveintomark.org/safari/csshacks/ http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=CssHack Enjoy or not ;) On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 18:15,

Re: [WSG] Standard Hacks?

2004-06-09 Thread Mark Stanton
I agree with Kay, avoid them when possible, Certainly don't take the approach of including a bunch of them in every CSS regardless of whether you need them or not. If you are after more specific information on hacks (or filters as they are also known), check out

Re: [WSG] Standard Hacks?

2004-06-09 Thread Nick Lo
I think that's a great idea actually. In theory yes we should all avoid hacks but there are a few reasons where a big fat list of the standard hacks, reasons for use and pros and cons would be useful... 1. If a deadline is looming and a hack will temporarily get you through it without

Re: [WSG] Standard Hacks?

2004-06-09 Thread Rick Faaberg
I think that's a great idea actually. In theory yes we should all avoid hacks but there are a few reasons where a big fat list of the standard hacks, reasons for use and pros and cons would be useful... 1. If a deadline is looming and a hack will temporarily get you through it without

Re: [WSG] Standard Hacks?

2004-06-09 Thread Mordechai Peller
Chris Stratford wrote: It is always best to avoid any sort of hack. It's important to remember why hacks exist in the first place. More often than not, it's because a browser either doesn't support a feature of CSS, or worse, supports it incorrectly. There is always a way around a hack, if that

Re: [WSG] Standard Hacks?

2004-06-09 Thread Mark Harwood
media=screen is not a hack, thats statin the proper display device target for the relavent stylesheet. Hacks are things like the IE Underscore hack, they tend to be workarounds for CSS properties that are not yet implemented in certain browsers or that need slightly differnt values, theres

Re: [WSG] Standard Hacks?

2004-06-09 Thread Mordechai Peller
J4Web wrote: style type=text/css media=screen@import url(/stylesheets/wsg_advanced.css);/style link rel=stylesheet href=/stylesheets/wsg_main.css type=text/css media=screen Is the import hack a candidate for first (or sole) item on the list of standard hacks? After giving it some thought, I

RE: [WSG] Standard Hacks?

2004-06-09 Thread Peter Firminger
- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Harwood Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2004 11:35 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [WSG] Standard Hacks? media=screen is not a hack, thats statin the proper display device target for the relavent stylesheet. Hacks are things

Re: [WSG] Standard Hacks?

2004-06-09 Thread russ - maxdesign
Is the import hack a candidate for first (or sole) item on the list of standard hacks? It seems pretty essential to me to get version 4 browsers to degrade gracefully. CSS hacks are one of those questions (like font sizes) that bring out the fanatics from all sides. On one side you will have

Re: [WSG] Standard Hacks?

2004-06-09 Thread t94xr.net.nz webmaster
Hacks are for the Cowbot webdesigner who hasnt done his job right in the first place! ( or for a client thats given too much hassle and not enough cash to make the recode cost effective! ;] ) quite true - but there are hacks that are used to counteract behavours in browsers. Camz

Re: [WSG] Standard Hacks?

2004-06-09 Thread Rimantas Liubertas
-- Original Message - From: scott parsons [EMAIL PROTECTED] I do not know what industry you work in but in every industry I have worked in there is a great need for pixel precise layouts. Can you name some industries? ... Clients and the many print trained art directors

RE: [WSG] Standard Hacks?

2004-06-09 Thread Patrick Lauke
I do not know what industry you work in but in every industry I have worked in there is a great need for pixel precise layouts. When you go through 13 rounds of changes with a client and discuss things like the letter spacing on single superscript letters then you just might have to put

RE: [WSG] Standard Hacks?

2004-06-09 Thread Rimantas Liubertas
-- Original Message - From: Peter Firminger [EMAIL PROTECTED] Russ and I have discussed this at length and we have come to the opinion that the @import rule (when used in that manner) is indeed a hack but a harmless one. The reasoning is that it exploits a bug or particular

RE: [WSG] Standard Hacks?

2004-06-09 Thread Peter Firminger
No, we do it to specifically exploit this bug or particular behaviour so it is a hack. If you look at the stylesheets you'll see that there is basic css in the one that NN4 can see and all the other more advanced stuff is in the one it can't see. All quite deliberate using both methods to achieve

Re: [WSG] Standard Hacks?

2004-06-09 Thread Nick Lo
I just think it is a little simplistic and idealistic to tell newcomers to css that all hacks are bad. Good post Scott...It's a relief seeing real world scenarios used to backup reasons and choices. I'm often surprised at the number of educate your clients to understand why they cannot have