Gunlaug Sørtun wrote: > So, old hacks like the 'star html' hack for IE6 > (and older versions) is now "perfectly valid" IMO, > while hacks relying on bugs that have survived > into IE7, are extremely unsafe.
'extremely unsafe'? I'd say they are safe until Microsoft releases another IE version. With their track record, that could be *years*. Given the choice between littering my html (thousands of pages) with conditional comments, or adding couple of hacks to a single CSS file, I'll take the hacks, thank you very much. Despite all the doomsayers, I had zero problems with pages breaking when IE7 came out. cheers Geoff. ============================================================================== The information contained in this email and any attachment is confidential and may contain legally privileged or copyright material. It is intended only for the use of the addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you are not permitted to disseminate, distribute or copy this email or any attachments. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete this email from your system. The ABC does not represent or warrant that this transmission is secure or virus free. Before opening any attachment you should check for viruses. The ABC's liability is limited to resupplying any email and attachments ============================================================================== ******************************************************************* List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *******************************************************************
