My philosophy has always been "develop for FF, fix IE". But if I could pick one thing that's the stupidest thing implemented in FF, its exactly that box problem. Ever try making a div fill the top 30 pixels of the window and have a width of 100%? ARGH! Its next to impossible to get it working nicely in FF and IE simultaneously. That's one case where IE at least does the reasonable thing..FF always ends up being too wide.
Ugh, who's in charge of this idiocy...when we end up with "conditional comments", surely someone must have said "hang on a second, maybe there's a bigger issue here"?
<sigh>
/end rant
Man, that did feel good. Sorry to anyone on the list who really doesn't care bout this :-D
-Jerod
On 3/1/06, Gregory Hill <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Oh is Gecko == Mozilla? Oh well, can't keep them straight. As far as
I'm
> concerned there are only 2 browsers worth developing for, IE6 and FF >
> 1.07.
Remove IE 6 and I agree, hahahaha. Actually, I hate Mozilla's box model
(I know it's the w3c recommended one, but it's flawed. Width and height
should include padding and borders. When I say a box is 2 feet wide, I
don't mean if you subtract the box walls and the foam. /end rant). I
almost want to like Opera, but after spending an hour trying to figure
out why doing this doesn't work in Opera, I now am extremely leery of
it:
textarea.value = 'something';
textarea.style.visibility = 'hidden';
... more code ...
textarea.style.visibility = 'visible';
textarea.value = 'something else';
Whoops... the value was not changed. WTF?!! I ended up creating a new
textarea and replacing the old one with it before I set the value, but
only for Opera, as the other browsers all work fine.
> Yea.. Stupid browser makers. Wish we could pull them all into the town
> square for a good flogging.
Heh. I do realize that I'm a bit hypocritical complaining about them
when I could contribute to Mozilla, but our 'modern' browsers are years
behind where they should be. The stuff they're just getting to
should've been standard fare years ago. They spend all this time
implementing neato stuff like the canvas element, which in reality is
useless to the majority of site builders out there. But look, we can
make Doom in _javascript_!!! Meanwhile, we still have to use fandangled
_javascript_ methods to do simple animations, dragging/dropping, required
field checking, rounded corners, etc, etc. Those should've been
implemented in the browser (or even in the standard in some cases) years
ago. As much as I dislike Microsoft, I think the w3c should've picked
up on their filter concept. Maybe changed the syntax or whatever, but I
want css gradients, opacity, blurring, drop-shadows, etc, etc (not sure
IE does all of those). I've wanted them for years, and I don't think
I'm in the minority.
Anyhoo, sorry if I seem whiny today; I need a good rant now and again to
feel better. I must need a nap or something :)
Greg
_______________________________________________
Rails-spinoffs mailing list
Rails-spinoffs@lists.rubyonrails.org
http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails-spinoffs
_______________________________________________ Rails-spinoffs mailing list Rails-spinoffs@lists.rubyonrails.org http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails-spinoffs
