or cookies! Lisa Cruz Teledermatology System Administrator Office of Clinical Operations Great Plains Regional Medical Command 2410 Stanley Rd., Suite B-17 Ft Sam Houston, Texas 78234-6230 210-295-2705 DSN: 421-2705 Fax: 210-295-2345 DSN: 421-2345
-----Original Message----- From: Paul Fennell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 11:08 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [ cf-dev ] muddy code WAS <div> vs. <table> Hehe I knew u ment pj :) But I needed to say we don�t need no stinking badges - -----Original Message----- From: Tomo Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 04 November 2003 16:56 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [ cf-dev ] muddy code WAS <div> vs. <table> sorry my message was aimed at the other Paul... surely it's good to be informed about things rather than fear them - you have a good point, and I think it's a case of using the right tool for the right job... ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Fennell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 4:42 PM Subject: RE: [ cf-dev ] muddy code WAS <div> vs. <table> I will not even go in to why people hate been forced to update or change - ( we fear channnnge.. ) but by using the same ideology with how should I code and be dammed the users who can use the site.... I don�t think any clients would be happy with the reply that im trying to move people into using new web-standards at the expence of loss of audience and useability -----Original Message----- From: Tomo Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 04 November 2003 16:12 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [ cf-dev ] muddy code WAS <div> vs. <table> Paul, Take a look at this book: http://www.zeldman.com/dwws/ I read it a couple of weeks ago, and it has some very good discussion on why we should be trying to move people into using new web-standards. I can't say I agree with everything he says, but I certainly agree with about 80% of it. Cheers, Tom ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Johnston" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 4:08 PM Subject: RE: [ cf-dev ] muddy code WAS <div> vs. <table> > tis a good point... it is more of a problem when you're > viewing the source through the browser. At the developing end > I'm doing everything modular anyway so it's in manageable > chunks. And 3 nested tables aren't necessarily the easiest > things to read, especially if they got colspans and rowspans > all over the place... it mostly depends on how well the code > is written surely? Yes we *should* all be writing modular and maintainable code, but we never do... On the same hand, I reckon we *should* all be writing fully cross-browser compliant code, but we don't... And again, what would happen if we all of a sudden said "I'm only going to write for the top 95% of browsers"...? > ...I'm playing devil's advocate really as like Paul, I'm only > starting to look at using div layouts properly =8^P I have used div layouts before, but not well... I was merely trying to start a discussion on whether it was worth pursuing or not. So far, no-one has made it clear that I should stick with tables and simple layouts... In fact I'm getting to the point of being hacked off by people saying "Always use the lowest common denominator"... I've been writing code that is HTML 3.2 (or 4.0 depending) compliant for many many years... What's wrong with making people upgrade their browsers? It's not like it's difficult to do... Why shouldn't we as a developer community stand firm and say "Let's make users upgrade their browsers, because the experience of browsing is better"? Paul -- ** Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/dev%40lists.cfdeveloper.co.uk/ To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For human help, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- ** Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/dev%40lists.cfdeveloper.co.uk/ To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For human help, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.536 / Virus Database: 331 - Release Date: 03/11/2003 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.536 / Virus Database: 331 - Release Date: 03/11/2003 -- ** Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/dev%40lists.cfdeveloper.co.uk/ To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For human help, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- ** Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/dev%40lists.cfdeveloper.co.uk/ To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For human help, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.536 / Virus Database: 331 - Release Date: 03/11/2003 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.536 / Virus Database: 331 - Release Date: 03/11/2003 -- ** Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/dev%40lists.cfdeveloper.co.uk/ To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For human help, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
