"ahmed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
9lvmp1$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:9lvmp1$[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 22 Aug 2001:
> Wow wow guys,, g it was only a Q,,
>
> I call it the mozilla way and ie way because they have 2 different
> methods,..
>
> and people stop being paranoid.. I'm totally pro Mozilla!
>
> I'm discussing the validity of the w3c's choice!,, hey the spec is
> made FOR developers, to help make the net a better place! and since
> I am a developer, I think I have the right an opinion,...
>
> Now, I don't care who does what in the w3c, I just think the way ie
> does the z-index thing makes more sense, maybe mozilla should point
> it out to the w3c(does mozilla have a place there or is it
> Netscape?) hey its like the innerHTML thing, its an IE developed
> spec, w3c doesn't have it, But mozilla adopted it because they
> thought its the right thing to do, AND the w3c (after
> recommendation from ms/and I think NS)is going to adopt it..
>
> Now what's the big mistake I did, when saying that I like(me a web
> developer) the way ie lays out z-index?
>
The big mistake is you are coding against the standards. If every web
designer out there would just say "ok, I don't care what bill gates
thinks I should do, the written spec says I do it this way", the world
would be so much better. IE would have almost complete standards
support, instead of it's ridiculous support of whatever MS decides they
want to support. That's the big deal here. You aren't coding it "the
IE way", you are coding it completely against how the standards
documents say it should be done. the "mozilla way" is the W3C way, and
the way every standards document says it should be done. Code to
standards, not to browsers. If you code to standards, browsers will
follow. If people continue to make exceptions for poor standards
support, no browser will ever try to support any standards because they
won't have to.
--
ICQ: 123728792
AIM: FlyersR1 9
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_ = m
