Ben Rogers wrote: > Quirks mode allows developers to maintain backwards compatibility and avoid > all those really ugly hacks you included in your message. The problem with > the hacks is that they all rely on implementation bugs. If this were object > oriented programming, the phrase would be "program to the interface, not the > implementation."
Quirks mode also prevents developers from utilizing the standards advances and CSS support in IE 6. In addition, it only allows backwards compatibility in IE, which says nothing of more modern browsers like Mozilla and Firefox, which don't suffer from many of these problems. As I said before, regardless of which method you choose, you will still have to work around IE's broken box model--you can do it for just IE 5.x or you can do it for IE 5+, but quirks mode doesn't fix the problem; it compounds it. I don't like hacking and I avoid it whenever possible; however, there are times when you have to weigh the distaste of the hack against the desire for accessibility and standards--either way I don't care, I was just clarifying. > I agree with the use of conditional comments as override mechanism for the > reasons you mention. It's important to note the difference between this and > the other hacks you described: this is a documented feature. As such, you > can rely on it. It's also semantically clear. You can rely on the hacks to a great extent. The only caveats being that someone decides to create a browser that doesn't fully understand escapes (w\idth) and supporting NN 4.x, which is easily worked around using the @import method. > My interpretation of what Micha was saying is that trying to use standards > mode (as opposed to quirks mode), brings out the bugs and odd behavior in > older browsers. This leads to more development time and ugly hacks like the > ones you mentioned. Of course, I may have misunderstood Micha. :) Using standards mode may very well highlight the bugs in older browsers... but that's because standards mode is obviously a better implementation of the specs and we are bound to see the flaws of older browsers more easily. The need to use an *ugly hack* to correct an older browser's shortcomings should not be the basis for breaking a newer browser so we don't notice those bugs. You call it backwards compatibility and I'll call it backwards thinking. Either way I have no problems at all developing for IE 6 in standards mode, while maintaining support for IE 5.x. -- Best regards, Michael Wilson ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:187395 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
