On Tue, 30 Oct 2001 00:43:46 -0800, "John Hokanson Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Monday 29 October 2001 11:51 pm, you wrote: > > On Mon, 29 Oct 2001 18:44:33 -0800, "John Hokanson Jr." > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > wrote: > > > On Monday 29 October 2001 05:41 pm, you wrote: > > > > On Mon, 29 Oct 2001 13:45:52 -0800, "John Hokanson Jr." > > > > > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > On Monday 29 October 2001 08:26 am, you wrote: > > > MZ is a fine browser and worthy of the Netscape legacy, but it > > > needs a lot of tweeking. Personally, I would like to see a > > > feature-freeze initiated after 1.0 so that what they already have > > > can be refined. > > > > I think that's what they plan on doing. > > > > The state of Mozilla is not nearly as bad as it looks. People > > complain about the number of bugs it has, but the reality is that > > the vast majority of these bugs are either duplicates or invalid. > > I haven't noticed any bugs. Again, as I told you before, once you > get it up and running, it runs beautifully.
I was referring to the official Mozilla bug count. Some people have looked at the high number of official bugs and concluded that Mozilla is a write-off. This is not the case, although things are obviously not as good as they should be. Being the pioneer commercial-free software collaboration project, it should have been expected to have hit some snags. The infrastructure they have built simply to support the browser design project (e.g. Bugzilla and Tinderbox) are nothing short of amazing, and form the spine of many open source projects today (e.g. MandrakeSoft and GNOME use Bugzilla). > They need to optimimize the code, and I need to get more RAM. > Once both of these happen, I'm sure it'll be a great webbrowser. > :) Me too. > > If MSIE is 100% W3C standards-compliant, then there is no real > > problem. By this, I don't mean "100% w3C plus IE-only extensions", > > I mean only 100% W3C. > > This appears to be where our fundamental disagreement is. While > it could be argued that MSIE's proprietary standards can confuse > the web community, when you take what I said above about > responsibility, it shouldn't really matter. It hardly warrants > posting warnings if you don't use their proprietary code on your > webpage. Well I never really disputed that. > The type of browsers you are speaking of are a relatively new > concept. Netscape has had their own proprietary tags. Yeah, they started this whole mess. However, they were also among the first to dump all that proprietary stuff and decide to start afresh with open standards. > > > I myself type the majority of code by hand. > > > > You are probably in the minority of web designers out there, and > > you appear to be much more competant than most of them. I'm sure > > that there are many that rely on tools like Dreamweaver, which > > generates horrid code. > > > > I tend not to use WYSIWYG tools. The exception to this is image > mapping, where it is a pain (and unnecessary) to do the grid > coordinates by hand. For shaaaame! :) > I have used early versions of Homesite (pre-5.0), which is > mostly a text-based editor. I use it primarly because it allows > rapid placement of tags (all of which observe standards). It > also has built-in validation tools. I personally like to finish-off my pages in Amaya to make sure they are standards-compliant. Then I run them through the W3C validator. > > I read all > > the time about companies and sites choosing to support only IE > > because it is "too difficult" to support multiple browsers. How > > hard is it to design a standards-compliant site that features a > > decent level of functionality? > > > > Who are these idiots? I thought the same thing. > And they're probably using Frontpage, which chruns out > needlessly complex (and probably IE specific) code. It'd be > interesting to see whether or not they actually *write* their > code, or allow some program to do it for them. These are the kind of people I was referring to when I talked about "lazy" designers. There are far too many of them. While we'll never be able to get them up off their lazy backsides to do things properly, we _can_ try to make sure that the tools they use generate standards-compliant code. It would make a world of difference if Dreamweaver was compliant. > God, I'm only 20, and I feel old. I know how you feel. I'll be 20 in January, yet most of my computing experience has been at a command-line. > I once created a simple HTML document in a text editor, > and then handed it over to Frontpage, and you wouldn't > believe the crap it added in. I once tried that as well. The results are terrible. MS Word is another key offender. Surprisingly, StarOffice isn't that bad at all. It can generate code (complete with tables, etc.) reasonably close to the HTML 3.2 spec. After a little tweaking, everything is compliant. > It's a bit like have MS Access write its own SQL statements > or doing it by hand. Doing it by hand will almost ALWAYS > generate tighter cross-platform code. I know _exactly_ what you mean. At my university (The University of Sydney), they start us off with Access in our database subjects. I have no idea why; the SQL generated is simply wrong. After that we go on to Sybase and do real SQL. I'm currently heading the project to redesign the website for our Information Systems Department (in more of a technical role than a design one). The current site is simply horrible, particularly the front page. Head on over to http://www.infosys.usyd.edu.au to be shocked at the sheer incompetance of an infosys department. These guys claim to be experts in this field. Unfortunately, this seems to be the worldwide trend :( I'm also responsible for the redesign of our Information Systems Student Society site (I'm the Secretary). I've got to make sure that these sites work well in Lynx and old versions of Netscape, otherwise the hardcore computer science students will go bananas (not that I mind - I use Lynx too). This is the kind of scenario where standards can really help. -- Sridhar Dhanapalan "It's entirely untested, but it looks good and compiles. Ship it!" -- Linus Torvalds
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
