Re: [css-d] How will firefox 3 affect web developers?
Rick Faircloth wrote: ... Some developers are idealists who want to live in the world *they* develop as far as what browsers deserve attention and development time. The rest of us live in the real world. I challenge any developer to ... You can't expect them to explore IE only. It would be just too boring. If there weren't those who experimented with all browsers, those who came back with spin-off solutions for IE in their hands and cared to share their knowledge for your daily convenience in this IE self help group, then today you and your business would probably be left alone with an unobstrusive script that doubles the margin of floats in inferior browsers that aren't used very often. Ingo -- http://www.satzansatz.de/css.html __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] How will firefox 3 affect web developers?
I think what we're seeing is a division between those who are driven to explore the boundaries of development and those whose top priority is simply making money with their work. And don't get me wrong, I used to be one of the cutting-edge explorers. Not in the world of web development, but in a previous field. Partly, this is just a sign of my growing older and having to take care of concerns such as the mortgage, kids in college, etc., as well as my realization that browsers are constantly changing and that the perfect cross-browser solution I develop today will be irrelevant tomorrow. Already there's a huge discussion about the impact on development of FF3. IE 7 has made a huge difference over IE 6. Personally, I can't wait for IE 6 to go away, if for nothing else so I can use transparent png's natively. So I've decided to just split all these concerns down the middle and be pragmatic. I'll develop for the users (not the browsers) that will be viewing my work. I'm not aware that anyone has ever even viewed one of my sites on Opera. My stats show about 98% of visitors to sites are IE users. I throw in concern for Firefox, because it is catching on with more people and shouldn't be ignored. But, it's just not worth it on a monetary level, to spend so much time trying to make everything work well for every user environment. The users have to make some compromises, too. And various browsers are becoming so cross-platform that it's much easier for users to use whatever browser they like for the OS platform. Again, my approach is simply a pragmatic one. I'll leave it up to you guys with the time, energy, and constant salary where you can afford to spend 4 days on a tiny issue with an obscure browser for the sheer pleasure of conquering the problem. That doesn't concern me... I just need to keep the work flowing and pleasing my clients. I'm self-employed, which, I think makes a big difference in perspective, too. We're all going to approach this a little (or a lot) differently depending on life circumstances and goals. Just some thoughts... no rocks, slings, or arrows. :o) Rick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ingo Chao Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 3:04 AM To: css-d@lists.css-discuss.org Subject: Re: [css-d] How will firefox 3 affect web developers? Rick Faircloth wrote: ... Some developers are idealists who want to live in the world *they* develop as far as what browsers deserve attention and development time. The rest of us live in the real world. I challenge any developer to ... You can't expect them to explore IE only. It would be just too boring. If there weren't those who experimented with all browsers, those who came back with spin-off solutions for IE in their hands and cared to share their knowledge for your daily convenience in this IE self help group, then today you and your business would probably be left alone with an unobstrusive script that doubles the margin of floats in inferior browsers that aren't used very often. Ingo -- http://www.satzansatz.de/css.html __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/ __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] How will Firefox 3 affect web developers?
Sorry for my absence in this discussion, list! My HD had a meltdown. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] discuss.org] On Behalf Of Rick Faircloth Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 5:55 AM I think what we're seeing is a division between those who are driven to explore the boundaries of development and those whose top priority is simply making money with their work. And don't get me wrong, I used to be one of the cutting-edge explorers. Not in the world of web development, but in a previous field. Maybe it's just my biased perspective, but how can you not be on the cutting-edge and still professionally do web development? The web is a moving entity, and will continue to grow for the foreseeable future. New technologies come out (CSS, XHTML) and become the (generally accepted) standard - IMHO, you need to migrate to survive. I suppose the realistic alternative is to sit back and wait for the explorers to come out with something, but I don't know - I prefer to be proactive, not reactive. Partly, this is just a sign of my growing older and having to take care of concerns such as the mortgage, kids in college, etc., as well as my realization that browsers are constantly changing and that the perfect cross-browser solution I develop today will be irrelevant tomorrow. But it is today, not tomorrow. With this mentality, where do you draw the line? IE6 is still very strong in the market, as much as it pains us all, but it is a reality. But, it's just not worth it on a monetary level, to spend so much time trying to make everything work well for every user environment. The users have to make some compromises, too. And various browsers are becoming so cross-platform that it's much easier for users to use whatever browser they like for the OS platform. Again, my approach is simply a pragmatic one. I'll leave it up to you guys with the time, energy, and constant salary where you can afford to spend 4 days on a tiny issue with an obscure browser for the sheer pleasure of conquering the problem. This topic has evolved so much, I don't know if most people know where it originated. You can read my post on speeding development for IE6 here: http://www.phazm.com/notes/productivity/stop-the-hate-ie6-isnt-so-bad/ I cannot imagine spending 4 on IE6 issues... maybe it was an exaggeration, but I can't remember a time when I spent more than 2 hours on an IE6 bug, 3 tops. That doesn't concern me... I just need to keep the work flowing and pleasing my clients. I'm self-employed, which, I think makes a big difference in perspective, too. I don't know who your clients are, or how educated they are regarding the web, but ignoring a large market simply because you want to save a buck doesn't sound like the right way to do business. You may have a very small amount of users from IE6, in which case it might be more acceptable for you to do so, but for myself, I consider it a duty of a professional web developer to make a site accessible. And again, it really doesn't take that long, I think you just need a bit more practice recognizing what bugs there are in IE6 and how to fix them. We're all going to approach this a little (or a lot) differently depending on life circumstances and goals. I am also a freelancer, and have a wife and a son who rely on me to put food on the table, but I also take great pride in my work, as I would expect for anyone that works for me. For example, if I hire a contractor to put an addition on my house, I expect him to use the standards he has to use, instead of saving a bit of time and money by not putting in a few studs or insulation. If I was a client hiring someone to create a website, I would have the same standards. Just some thoughts... no rocks, slings, or arrows. :o) Hey, same here! I am a bit passionate about the topic of ignoring potential viewers, so my words may come out a bit over-zealous, but I assure you, no hard feelings! - Jon __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] How will Firefox 3 affect web developers?
Hi, Jon... Thanks for your comments. I don't think I share quite the same passion for making my sites accessible to whatever browser they like as you do. I expect them to meet me partway. But, I think you're misunderstanding my comments in a couple of ways. One, as far as being cutting-edge, it's not that I don't keep up with what's happening and how to use most of it, but my clients tend to have fairly simple needs, and I learn to build what they require. And another aspect of that is how soon I adopt new technologies and methods. I used to purchase an upgrade to my OS's as soon as they hit the shelves, but I found out how disastrous that can be for production. Now I tend to wait until at least Server Pack 1 or about a year of common use has gone by before even thinking of adapting to the new OS. Same thing with web development (in some ways)... some people just enjoy being on that cutting edge and blazing new trails. And that's fine... nothing wrong there. I used to be more like that. Now I prefer to let others who enjoy wrestling with the new stuff work on the issues. It's just a personality thing... Now, as far as IE 6 goes, I think we're really miscommunicating there. I do target IE 6 as much as IE 7, since it's still so heavily in use. I target IE6, IE7, and FF2 for now. That's about all I can handle, being new to CSS and all its methods and quirks. And, again, I've never seen anyone of my users on my analytics reports that use anything but IE6, IE7, FF2, or Safari. If I had a sudden surge of Opera users at 50%, I'd target Opera for development first. It's all about what the users are using. Funny you should mention working on your house... when I build a new one next spring, you can be sure the contractor, etc. will be among the best in the business. However, I won't require someone who can build a skyscraper, too, just someone who know how to build the type of home I require. I don't expect a builder to specialize in every type of building in existence. Thanks for the comments. :o) Rick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jon Hughes Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 11:53 AM To: Rick Faircloth; css-d@lists.css-discuss.org Subject: Re: [css-d] How will Firefox 3 affect web developers? Sorry for my absence in this discussion, list! My HD had a meltdown. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] discuss.org] On Behalf Of Rick Faircloth Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 5:55 AM I think what we're seeing is a division between those who are driven to explore the boundaries of development and those whose top priority is simply making money with their work. And don't get me wrong, I used to be one of the cutting-edge explorers. Not in the world of web development, but in a previous field. Maybe it's just my biased perspective, but how can you not be on the cutting-edge and still professionally do web development? The web is a moving entity, and will continue to grow for the foreseeable future. New technologies come out (CSS, XHTML) and become the (generally accepted) standard - IMHO, you need to migrate to survive. I suppose the realistic alternative is to sit back and wait for the explorers to come out with something, but I don't know - I prefer to be proactive, not reactive. Partly, this is just a sign of my growing older and having to take care of concerns such as the mortgage, kids in college, etc., as well as my realization that browsers are constantly changing and that the perfect cross-browser solution I develop today will be irrelevant tomorrow. But it is today, not tomorrow. With this mentality, where do you draw the line? IE6 is still very strong in the market, as much as it pains us all, but it is a reality. But, it's just not worth it on a monetary level, to spend so much time trying to make everything work well for every user environment. The users have to make some compromises, too. And various browsers are becoming so cross-platform that it's much easier for users to use whatever browser they like for the OS platform. Again, my approach is simply a pragmatic one. I'll leave it up to you guys with the time, energy, and constant salary where you can afford to spend 4 days on a tiny issue with an obscure browser for the sheer pleasure of conquering the problem. This topic has evolved so much, I don't know if most people know where it originated. You can read my post on speeding development for IE6 here: http://www.phazm.com/notes/productivity/stop-the-hate-ie6-isnt-so-bad/ I cannot imagine spending 4 on IE6 issues... maybe it was an exaggeration, but I can't remember a time when I spent more than 2 hours on an IE6 bug, 3 tops. That doesn't concern me... I just need to keep the work flowing and pleasing my clients. I'm self-employed, which, I think
Re: [css-d] How will Firefox 3 affect web developers?
Rick Faircloth wrote: It is wearing thin. Do you have an answer to a css question someone has posted, or a css question you would like to post? __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] How will firefox 3 affect web developers?
Since there always are a few designers who could learn a trick or two about how to break their carefully crafted CSS based layouts before their visitors do, I think it might not hurt to finish off my contribution to this thread with one last comment. DAVOUD TOHIDY wrote: How many times have you happened to open up different browser windows on your monitor and you have resized your browser window and you have encountered problem reading and using the web content because of overlaps etc.? How many times you think visually impaired individuals have tapped on ctrl+ to increase the text size you think? This is what I am trying to solve with layout stability. Fine. Existing guidelines are a bit old... http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT/ ...and the latest aren't up to much yet, they say... http://www.alistapart.com/articles/tohellwithwcag2 If you can improve on things than nothing would be better. This looks like an ok place to start... http://www.jimthatcher.com/sidebyside.htm ...and the rest are better suited for... http://www.webaim.org/discussion/ Come on give up now :) . Why :-) Since we're onto font-resizing: I usually test my creations to '200%' or 'minimum font size = 28px' and check for readability. Minor breakage of design is the norm, and your portfolio is no different in that respect. Plenty of sites that can't take any font-resizing though, so of course you have a point. I also zoom pages to 200% on a 1280 screen - with the mentioned 'minimum font size', and that can be very hard on many layouts. Yours is still a bit too rigid for such treatment, but I've sure seen them worse. ..., but I don't care one bit if it breaks a whole set of rules, definitions and best practices in order to be more flexible than required by known media. Then you are ignoring those who need more readability, Usability and a better user experience. My goal is to providing a better environment for Human Computer Interaction or (HCI). Gosh, that was part of my working title back in the mid 80'. We didn't have the www, HTML and CSS to deal with then, but we had the problems... - If I think a weak User Agent should be supported, then I'll give it something on a level it can handle - without disturbing the better User Agents. I agree. That's a natural part of an inherently unstable approach anyway, and doesn't yield worse results than any other approach. Well not necessarily, It can be an inherently stable approach. So, we have two approaches that aim to solve some of the same problems. Good, I have no problems with that. Let us know how it turns out. I'll continue tuning styles for Opera Mini 4 now. I also have to check up improvements/changes in CSS support in Firefox 3 and Safari 3 vs. older versions a bit more in depth, to see if there's anything that affect my work as a web developer. So far all I can say is that I don't think so. regards Georg -- http://www.gunlaug.no __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] How will firefox 3 affect web developers?
On 2007/12/01 21:30 (GMT-1000) [EMAIL PROTECTED] apparently typed: From: DAVOUD TOHIDY [EMAIL PROTECTED] to provide a better user experience. My portfolio located at: http://cssfreelancer.awardspace.com is a sample of such a design . Thus it provides a flexible-rigid data-exchange vehicle (design) for the web environment. At +3 steps up from default font in Firefox 2 on Linux, your left side menu overlaps the text. It only takes me +2 in Epiphany, and that's not its only problem. Several weeks ago on http://lists.evolt.org/archive/Week-of-Mon-20071105/192473.html is a thread on Tohidy's Layout Stability, where I demonstrated other problems on that page and touched on how to fix some of them. It has some widths set in px, so it poses typical problems at high DPI and the significantly higher text sizes in px generally necessitated in that context. He's since changed his color scheme, but I demonstrate its user experience degradation and compare to using ems at: http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/SS/Davoto/davoto.html http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/SS/Davoto/sc-davoto2.html http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/SS/Davoto/sc-davoto3.html http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/SS/Davoto/sc-davoto-i3.jpg (float drop, 3 word columns, overlapping) -- Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. John Adams Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/ __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] How will firefox 3 affect web developers?
At 02:41 AM 12/2/2007, Gunlaug Sørtun wrote: I suppose I should install Opera and Safari, too, but I just haven't bothered (and at least Opera is good enough with standards compliance that I wouldn't expect anything I'd be doing would break it. You should have all major browsers available for testing even if they are pretty close on most CSS related stuff. Firefox 3.0b1 doesn't look too bad so far, but Fx 2 is/was a bit behind. With all due respect to Opera and Safari's users, based on the visitor stats of the sites I manage (and on stats from sites like thecounter.com), by testing in Firefox and IE, I _am_ testing for all _major_ browsers. I should probably add Safari, as its usage seems to be approaching 5%, but Opera is hardly even a blip on the radar, usually falling below unknown or other on the various lists. Yeah, I know Opera includes a built-in user agent switcher that could deflate its stats, but if it's own users won't even stand up and be counted, I'm not going to bother trying to guess how many of them there might be. :) Erik Harrishttp://www.eHarrisHome.com -AIM: KngFuJoe - Yahoo IM: kungfujoe7 - ICQ: 2610172- Chinese-Indonesian Martial Arts Club http://www.kungfu-silat.com __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] How will firefox 3 affect web developers?
Erik Harris wrote: Yeah, I know Opera includes a built-in user agent switcher that could deflate its stats, but if it's own users won't even stand up and be counted, I'm not going to bother trying to guess how many of them there might be. :) Count me out then - I never surf the web with any other browser :-) It is not a question about being counted. There are too many sites that create problems for Opera-users for no other reason than to create problems for Opera-users - probably mixed with a solid dose of ignorance, so regular users of that browser got no choice, really. Once being forced to switch I suspect regular Opera-users to leave its id in the state it happens to be in, since only dysfunctional sites use browser-id as protection. I use the whole array of id's and other tricks built into Opera when I test the quality of sites and the work of their developers. It's an efficient way to separate the good from the not so good, and learn what not to do in web design. As a designer: I never read stats since I have no interest in knowing what visitors to any of my creations are using. I don't make guesses either, since my only interest surrounding browsers is what each of them are capable and not capable of so I can work around their weak spots. As a user: it's the same capability I use as guide. Has made my choices rather simple so far, I'd say. Since this thread started off with a question about the upcoming version of Firefox, for me that browser doesn't make it near the top neither for developing nor using in the state its beta is in, and it doesn't advance much compared with previous versions. I hope that'll improve before the final gets released. Firefox is easy to fix so visitors aren't being bothered, but it excludes itself on, for me, essential points, so Firefox 3 will still only be useful for testing - of itself. Of course, Firefox 3 has no effect on me as a designer since, as mentioned, nothing much has changed and I don't read stats. regards Georg -- http://www.gunlaug.no __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] How will firefox 3 affect web developers?
With all due respect to Opera and Safari's users, based on the visitor stats of the sites I manage (and on stats from sites like thecounter.com), by testing in Firefox and IE, I _am_ testing for all _major_ browsers. Absolutely agree... FF and IE are the *only* major browsers. All the rest are just wanna-be's. So few people use the other browsers they don't deserve any of my time to accommodate their off-the-mainstream preference. And it's not about which one is the best browser... it's all about what most people use. Therefore, right now at least, IE truly is the only *major* browser. Even FF is simply a more serious contender. Notice a wrote *more* serious contender. Not even a serious contender, yet. It's simply enough in use that I decide to devote time to making content look good on it. What makes a browser *major* is simply how much usage it has. Not how much it does or does not comply with standards. If Opera had 80% of the market share of browser usage, Opera would be my main develop target. But... As far as standards go, the most important standards are decided by the using public, not by the W3C. Some developers are idealists who want to live in the world *they* develop as far as what browsers deserve attention and development time. The rest of us live in the real world. I challenge any developer to develop an app for general consumption that works perfectly in FF and looks terrible in IE and see how much money that make from it. Rick PS - @ Erik... sorry, I meant to post this to the list and not just you, personally. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik Harris Sent: Sunday, December 02, 2007 9:19 AM To: css-d@lists.css-discuss.org Subject: Re: [css-d] How will firefox 3 affect web developers? At 02:41 AM 12/2/2007, Gunlaug Sørtun wrote: I suppose I should install Opera and Safari, too, but I just haven't bothered (and at least Opera is good enough with standards compliance that I wouldn't expect anything I'd be doing would break it. You should have all major browsers available for testing even if they are pretty close on most CSS related stuff. Firefox 3.0b1 doesn't look too bad so far, but Fx 2 is/was a bit behind. With all due respect to Opera and Safari's users, based on the visitor stats of the sites I manage (and on stats from sites like thecounter.com), by testing in Firefox and IE, I _am_ testing for all _major_ browsers. I should probably add Safari, as its usage seems to be approaching 5%, but Opera is hardly even a blip on the radar, usually falling below unknown or other on the various lists. Yeah, I know Opera includes a built-in user agent switcher that could deflate its stats, but if it's own users won't even stand up and be counted, I'm not going to bother trying to guess how many of them there might be. :) Erik Harrishttp://www.eHarrisHome.com -AIM: KngFuJoe - Yahoo IM: kungfujoe7 - ICQ: 2610172- Chinese-Indonesian Martial Arts Club http://www.kungfu-silat.com __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/ __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] How will firefox 3 affect web developers?
At 04:36 PM 12/2/2007, Gunlaug Sørtun wrote: It is not a question about being counted. There are too many sites that create problems for Opera-users for no other reason than to create problems for Opera-users - probably mixed with a solid dose of ignorance, so regular users of that browser got no choice, really. I've _occasionally_ run into sites that have problems with standards-compliant browsers, and when I do, I change my user agent with a Firefox extension that I installed years ago (it was one of the first available extensions, IIRC). Otherwise, I leave it as is. I don't even remember the last time I had any need to use the user agent switcher, though. Most issues I've seen in the last few years have been with sites genuinely using IE-proprietary features (usually MS apps like Web-Outlook, which my employer uses), where changing the user agent doesn't do the trick. Given that Opera's standards compliance is about as good as that of Firefox 2 (I'm not going to argue about which is better - each fails at things the other succeeds at, but both are at the top of the list), I wouldn't expect Opera users to need to mask their user agent frequently, either. That's why I figure users who use Opera and mask their user agent have only themselves to blame for no one taking Opera seriously based on visitor stats. Erik Harrishttp://www.eHarrisHome.com -AIM: KngFuJoe - Yahoo IM: kungfujoe7 - ICQ: 2610172- Chinese-Indonesian Martial Arts Club http://www.kungfu-silat.com __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] How will firefox 3 affect web developers?
On 2007/12/02 18:01 (GMT-0500) Erik Harris apparently typed: I figure users who use Opera and mask their user agent have only themselves to blame for no one taking Opera seriously based on visitor stats. Not all Opera users know about UA identification. Opera used to default to identifying itself as IE, and I believe upgrading leaves that old default undisturbed. This means most likely mostly only recently created Opera profiles are resulting in ID as Opera. -- Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. John Adams Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/ __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] How will firefox 3 affect web developers?
At 02:07 AM 12/1/2007, Gunlaug Sørtun wrote: No typo, but rather a reaction to the lowest common denominator design-approach I responded to. I rarely ever see sites the way they are designed - stable or not. I don't expect them to, and the mentioned approach doesn't help one bit on the end-result. Your advice is _generally_ true, since browsers _generally_ ignore stuff they don't understand, but extreme examples like the Acid Stress Test show that your advice doesn't _always_ hold. If you get fancy enough with standards-compliant code, some browsers won't simply miss features, they'll see something that's broken and unusable. Or they'll miss something that's important to understanding the page (e.g. a key animation that uses APNG). Two systems won't show a page in exactly the same manner for various reasons (viewport size, browser version, user preferences, etc), but that's not what designing to the lowest common denominator means. It's about designing so that the page looks acceptable on the lowest common denominator (which, depending on your site's audience, may be IE6, IE5, Lynx, or something else). Erik Harrishttp://www.eHarrisHome.com -AIM: KngFuJoe - Yahoo IM: kungfujoe7 - ICQ: 2610172- Chinese-Indonesian Martial Arts Club http://www.kungfu-silat.com __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] How will firefox 3 affect web developers? [medium]
Gunlaug Sørtun wrote: Curiosity killed the cat... -- Molly 'the cat' :-) Don't worry, they have lives to spare :) [···] Content being the same doesn't mean users get to or want to see it in the same way across the board, and that is often the reason why users learn about browser-options and/or switch browsers in order to get it right - for them. Thus, what the designer sees when comparing across browser-land and browser-options, and what an end-user sees, will only be the same by chance. Maybe we're talking about different things here. What I understand here would be basically the same as saying that the standards shouldn't exist and, though interpreting the same content / instructions, each browser should render it its own way. Now users wanting to see it differently (or 'right for them') would usually do, in my opinion, one of two things: - change the browser's skin - change the content's theme (css style), whereas allowed by the site itself or externally with a custom css or tools such as stylish (and themes built the community). As an example, ESPN's Game Cast doesn't seem to work on anything but IE, and that's plainly wrong. We should have past already the time when we told users to use the browser /we/ wanted instead of their own choice. Now, that's how I interpreted your comments, that's why I'm guessing we're talking about different things here. What were you referring to? [···] Browsers don't use the same engines and same calculations, and their set of options vary quite a bit. Sites designed with built-in stability limitations, doesn't help much on anything. Sites (meaning design here) should not be stable, they should adapt to the environment the very best they can - without disturbing the end-user. Well, yes, that's our current situation: different engines with different limitations, behavior and bugs. But CSS is supposed to help us achieve the layout we want without the need of changing the structure. That's what we were promised, and what the future should bring, but for that we need for all engines to follow the specs (and that these are actually complete), but the should you used isn't referring only to present, but also future posibilities, and that's I don't agree. Also, if we only use the little set that looks like working right in all browsers then we wouldn't be able to be creative and come up with good, different and non-stiffed designs... so we would all be working for lynx and that's the designs we would see all around the web. Continuing with your paragraph... if by stable you mean 'pixel-perfect' I agree on what you say, but stability for me has little (if any) relation with pixel-perfect, fixed, liquid or any other style. For me it just means that it's as bullet-proof as the current engines allow us to (which can be a darn pretty hard work by itself). There is in reality no lowest common denominator to design for - maybe apart from the one called ignorance, only some common standards with plenty of play-room, common sense and varying degree of support. Add in the growing number of hardware variables and see the world evolve. Not much stability in there, and neither should there be if we want some progress. In my opinion, there should be a lowest denominator, and that's simply because if doesn't, we won't be able to move forward. There *is* a need for getting rid of older and plainly defective browsers, but we can't, just because they're the users' belongings and we cannot control that, so we then have the only choice of ignoring some features or think on special cases. As a note: nothing of this should care to lynx in any way, we're talking about CSS, something lynx just ignores (as it should, I believe). The content is there, we're talking about the presentation here. Some earlier thoughts related to the subject, for those who care to read articles on a, by definition, pretty unstable site... http://www.gunlaug.no/contents/wd_additions_21.html regards Georg I still get the feeling that this is just a misunderstanding of your words, though maybe we do have different ways of thinking regarding our present and (possible) future in Web dev. Rafael. __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] How will firefox 3 affect web developers?
DAVOUD TOHIDY wrote: I think someone is defining site stability on the wrong premises Well if you are refering it to me, I never did define site stability. I was _only_ referring to arguments and wording in the mail I responded to. Erik H. used your response as base for his arguments, and can expand on his understanding of it. I did define Layout stability though. Now let me give you an example to make it clear what the difference is between those two phrases. A building is built by columns and beams etc. which these columnsand beams create the structure for that building. snipped - see the original / One type of building - mostly rigid ones, yes. So I believe, we will need to let other people call it site stability. No intention to offend anybody though :). Of course not. Names may cause confusion but /should/ otherwise not hurt or offend anyone. snipped again - see the original / Layout stability is not just a simple matter of what its phrase reffers to.That is why I have called for a case study and research at: http://cssfreelancer.awardspace.com/stability.html Problem arises when we assume that we know everything about it just bylooking at the definition of the layout stability phrase and act based on our assumptions. I believe I have pointed out an extremely important issue in regardsto make the web content more readable and more usable by calling for designing for layout stability. The issue is important enough, but to me it looks more like another attempt on limiting the constant flow of changes. I prefer an inherent layout instability, which doesn't necessarily go against what you're looking for but widens it to cover as many unknowns as possible at any one time. The differences at the moment seems to be one of presenting a building structure (design) in a set environment vs. providing a flexible data-exchange vehicle (design) for whatever environment. As the data-exchange format we know as 'the internet' is still in its infancy, at this moment in time I'm not occupied by the need for stability but rather for flexibility. Too many media are tapping into the data-stream (internet), and I want/need the flexibility to study, supply and make use of them. The mindset behind this isn't new, as they build fighter-jets with inherent instability to make them flexible enough to take advantage of every opening at any time. It seems however to be the opposite of the building structure you use for describing your layout stability, where you have to know the environment in order to build something that's stable. It seems like you're looking for definitions on how to create stable structures in the environments (media) we know, while I'm looking for openings out of the known environments (media) and into the unknown. It should be obvious from the above that I will only pay limited attention to known environments (media) and whatever definitions, rules and best practices anyone can come up with for them. Known environments are limited and limiting, and defining rules for how to approach them is, IMO, another limitation one can do without. I want to know more about available techniques/methods with the potential to work, not rules on how and when to apply them or how they should work. Thus, I prefer to create and work with something that is robust enough _to work_ on/in existing media, but I don't care one bit if it breaks a whole set of rules, definitions and best practices in order to be more flexible than required by known media. OTOH: breaking rules isn't a point in itself, and not something I do just for the sake of breaking them. The only reason I follow any rules - like standards, is that they actually work. - HTML works, and at the moment it seems to be the best tool available in its field. So, I use the variant(s) I feel most comfortable with at the moment, while waiting for something better. - CSS works, so I'm applying it as far as I want to and User Agent support can take me at any one time. I certainly won't hold back just because a few User Agents are not up to it. - If I think a weak User Agent should be supported, then I'll give it something on a level it can handle - without disturbing the better User Agents. That's a natural part of an inherently unstable approach anyway, and doesn't yield worse results than any other approach. regards Georg -- http://www.gunlaug.no __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] How will firefox 3 affect web developers? [medium]
Rafael wrote: Maybe we're talking about different things here. What I understand here would be basically the same as saying that the standards shouldn't exist and, though interpreting the same content / instructions, each browser should render it its own way. Standards are defined for implementors - browser developers, in order to level out the playing-field somewhat. Same parts of standards have plenty of play-room, so User Agents may end up different without breaking same standards, although they usually tune their implementations to some form of consensus over time. Now users wanting to see it differently (or 'right for them') would usually do, in my opinion, one of two things: - change the browser's skin - change the content's theme (css style), whereas allowed by the site itself or externally with a custom css or tools such as stylish (and themes built the community). No need to go into actual design-changes a user can apply to any page, as any end-user can improve or destroy any page/site at will if s/he so chooses. There's no solution to that, and it isn't what I'm onto. Much simpler approach: change font-size base ever so slightly - 'minimum font size', and break half the web in one go. There are so many small and large alterations one can make in a browser or by changing to another, that the short-list can become extremely long. Yet, unless a design is frozen, it will either have to adapt to small and large alterations or it will break. As an example, ESPN's Game Cast doesn't seem to work on anything but IE, and that's plainly wrong. We should have past already the time when we told users to use the browser /we/ wanted instead of their own choice. Indeed. However, if there's no cross-browser 'alternative' then it may not be so wrong after all. I haven't studied that particular case since its content is outside my field of interest. We should provide working solutions for as wide a range of User Agents as possible, but should not necessarily abandon solutions that may not yet be fully supported by all. This is where 'alternatives' come in, and we can only provide as good 'alternatives' as the User Agent(s) in question can handle. Now, that's how I interpreted your comments, that's why I'm guessing we're talking about different things here. What were you referring to? As seen in the above: I'm referring to the, usually quite small, alterations anyone can apply to any web page/site in their choice of browser. [···] Browsers don't use the same engines and same calculations, and their set of options vary quite a bit. Sites designed with built-in stability limitations, doesn't help much on anything. Sites (meaning design here) should not be stable, they should adapt to the environment the very best they can - without disturbing the end-user. Well, yes, that's our current situation: different engines with different limitations, behavior and bugs. But CSS is supposed to help us achieve the layout we want without the need of changing the structure. That's what we were promised, and what the future should bring, but for that we need for all engines to follow the specs (and that these are actually complete), but the should you used isn't referring only to present, but also future posibilities, and that's I don't agree. I haven't found any promises in the specs, only a limited set of options that User Agent developers can implement - if and when they feel like it. Nothing the spec-writers can do about the progress, or lack of it... http://blogs.msdn.com/alexmog/archive/2007/09/25/css-not-moving-blame-microsoft.aspx Also, if we only use the little set that looks like working right in all browsers then we wouldn't be able to be creative and come up with good, different and non-stiffed designs... so we would all be working for lynx and that's the designs we would see all around the web. Exactly my point. Lynx certainly isn't holding us back though - see below ;-) Continuing with your paragraph... if by stable you mean 'pixel-perfect' I agree on what you say, but stability for me has little (if any) relation with pixel-perfect, fixed, liquid or any other style. For me it just means that it's as bullet-proof as the current engines allow us to (which can be a darn pretty hard work by itself). I don't like the term bullet-proof, but otherwise I think we agree on the essential points... http://www.gunlaug.no/contents/wd_additions_26.html Gosh, that old layout has held up well for years, and now it is preparing to go, unchanged, into the future :-) In my opinion, there should be a lowest denominator, and that's simply because if doesn't, we won't be able to move forward. There *is* a need for getting rid of older and plainly defective browsers, but we can't, just because they're the users' belongings and we cannot control that, so we then have the only choice of ignoring some features or think on special cases.
Re: [css-d] How will firefox 3 affect web developers?
Erik Harris wrote: Your advice is _generally_ true, since browsers _generally_ ignore stuff they don't understand, but extreme examples like the Acid Stress Test show that your advice doesn't _always_ hold. If you get fancy enough with standards-compliant code, some browsers won't simply miss features, they'll see something that's broken and unusable. Or they'll miss something that's important to understanding the page (e.g. a key animation that uses APNG). So, I would give browsers a complete Acid Stress Test, and hide same test from weaker browser and provide them with an alternative. IE/win users may in this context be given a picture of the same test performed in a better browser, and maybe even a comment about what they're given - and why. I'm dealing with reality here and those weaker browsers can't do better anyway. IE/win users probably won't miss seeing IE/win's broken rendering, and they're not locked out in any way. I certainly can't see the point in not giving a strong browser as much as it can handle, for the sake of protecting users of weaker browsers. Some users of IE/win may not like being informed through facts that they are using an inferior browser, but if they want something better in IE/win then they'll have to ask Microsoft for better standard-support. Two systems won't show a page in exactly the same manner for various reasons (viewport size, browser version, user preferences, etc), but that's not what designing to the lowest common denominator means. It's about designing so that the page looks acceptable on the lowest common denominator (which, depending on your site's audience, may be IE6, IE5, Lynx, or something else). I'm in total agreement, apart from that then you don't have to _design_ to the lowest common denominator. Again, you can _design_ for the top-edge, and fix things to make it look acceptable in the weaker ones. Different use of words..? I think I prefer a bit of (dis)graceful degradation in weak browsers, so I can make most out of standards and standard-support in the better ones. At the moment I have some mediaqueries to test out in a couple of top-edge browsers, and it doesn't look like neither IE nor Firefox can make much out of that - yet. I won't wait any longer though. regards Georg -- http://www.gunlaug.no __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] How will firefox 3 affect web developers?
At 05:09 PM 12/1/2007, Gunlaug Sørtun wrote: So, I would give browsers a complete Acid Stress Test, and hide same test from weaker browser and provide them with an alternative. Aside from MSIE, how do you do this? You can use the MS-proprietary commented if statements to provide alternate markup for various versions of IE, which is useful for making up for IE's inability to do things right, but what about Opera? Safari? Firefox pre-3.0? Is there a straightforward way, aside from a JavaScript user agent checker, to provide the different browsers different style info (or markup)? I'm in total agreement, apart from that then you don't have to _design_ to the lowest common denominator. Again, you can _design_ for the top-edge, and fix things to make it look acceptable in the weaker ones. Different use of words..? I think so. That's pretty much how I do it, too - I design using both Firefox and the W3C validators to test, and then check out in IE6 and 7. I suppose I should install Opera and Safari, too, but I just haven't bothered (and at least Opera is good enough with standards compliance that I wouldn't expect anything I'd be doing would break it. As a Windows user, Safari wasn't even a possibility until recently). Erik Harrishttp://www.eHarrisHome.com -AIM: KngFuJoe - Yahoo IM: kungfujoe7 - ICQ: 2610172- Chinese-Indonesian Martial Arts Club http://www.kungfu-silat.com __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] How will firefox 3 affect web developers?
on Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2007 20:55:44 +0100 George wrote: One type of building - mostly rigid ones, yes... Well it seems now you are talking about an environment that I know :) . But no you are absolutely wrong. It does not matter If a building is flexible or rigid, it will have a structure created from columns,beams etc. Same thing in here, even though I might not be an expert in WWW but I have been working with computers since when we used to work with cards to interact with them back in I would say 1975 ! as just a simple user and I have worked with DOS environment and dos based editors and I have even passed some programming languages like FORTRAN at the university. I have produced three commercial training cds on windows xp hacks and Tweak UI and I have innovated a most effective method of copy protecting data cds. For more info please see my portfolio. I have been then working with internet as a user since late 1999 and started to work professionally since 2005. It seems like you're looking for definitions on how to create stable structures in the environments (media) we know, while I'm looking for openings out of the known environments (media) and into the unknown. Continuing my above speech: So no it does not seem that way, that is you seeing it that way :). I know the environment very well, and I have transfered my stability skills from civil engineering to web environment and there is nothing wrong with that. The issue is important enough, but to me it looks more like another attempt on limiting the constant flow of changes. Well, that is your idea which I respect, but it is not a fact. No as i said it before purpose of a stable web environment is not limiting anything rather it creates a more user friendly environment to go with the flow of changes. I just can not understand why you are ignoring the fact that stability for web design increases the readability and usability of web content. Do you disagree with this? I prefer an inherent layout instability, which doesn't necessarily go... But I prefer an inherent layout stability, which does necessarily goes in the way of what you are looking for which is providing a better user experience. The differences at the moment seems to be one of presenting a building structure (design) in a set environment vs. providing a flexible data-exchange vehicle (design) for whatever environment. Well I believe you have misunderestood the definition of layout stability . layout stability does not create a 100% rigid web content rather it creates a flexible-rigid web content while increasing the readability and usability of web content to provide a better user experience. My portfolio located at: http://cssfreelancer.awardspace.com is a sample of such a design . Thus it provides a flexible-rigid data-exchange vehicle (design) for the web environment. As the data-exchange format we know as 'the internet' is still in its infancy, at this moment in time I'm not occupied by the need for stability but rather for flexibility. Again please see my above comment too. But Why not? Stability is not against flexibility rather it helps to remove the defeciencies of flexibility. How many times have you happened to open up different browser windows on your monitor and you have resized your browser window and you have encountered problem reading and using the web content because of overlaps etc.? How many times you think visually impaired individuals have tapped on ctrl+ to increase the text size you think? This is what I am trying to solve with layout stability. Known environments are limited and limiting, and defining rules for how to... Even though I understand your point and agree with the fact that we should not restrict ourselves and our environment but sometimes by setting some rules we will have a more safe and usable environement. As a sample we rule that to keep our computers safe (no hackers or viruses) we need to install an internet security suite in our computers (environment). Purpose of layout stability is to providing a safe readable and usable environment regardless of circumstances. Come on give up now :) . ..., but I don't care one bit if it breaks a whole set of rules, definitions and best practices in order to be more flexible than required by known media. Then you are ignoring those who need more readability, Usability and a better user experience. My goal is to providing a better environment for Human Computer Interaction or (HCI). - If I think a weak User Agent should be supported, then I'll give it something on a level it can handle - without disturbing the better User Agents. I agree. That's a natural part of an inherently unstable approach anyway, and doesn't yield worse results than any other approach. Well not necessarily, It can be an inherently stable approach. Regards, davoud
Re: [css-d] How will firefox 3 affect web developers?
DAVOUD TOHIDY wrote: on Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2007 20:55:44 +0100 George wrote: One type of building - mostly rigid ones, yes... Well it seems now you are talking about an environment that I know :) . Well, that's nice. But frankly, you and your environment bore me. Do you have a CSS question or answer you might want to share? __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] How will firefox 3 affect web developers?
- Original Message - From: DAVOUD TOHIDY [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Saturday, December 1, 2007 9:03 pm Subject: Re: [css-d] How will firefox 3 affect web developers? To: css-d@lists.css-discuss.org The differences at the moment seems to be one of presenting a buildingstructure (design) in a set environment vs. providing a flexible data-exchange vehicle (design) for whatever environment. Well I believe you have misunderestood the definition of layout stability . layout stability does not create a 100% rigid web content rather it creates a flexible-rigid web content while increasing the readability and usability of web content to provide a better user experience. My portfolio located at: http://cssfreelancer.awardspace.com is a sample of such a design . Thus it provides a flexible-rigid data-exchange vehicle (design) for the web environment. At +3 steps up from default font in Firefox 2 on Linux, your left side menu overlaps the text. David authenticity, honesty, community [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] How will firefox 3 affect web developers?
Erik Harris wrote: At 05:09 PM 12/1/2007, Gunlaug Sørtun wrote: So, I would give browsers a complete Acid Stress Test, and hide same test from weaker browser and provide them with an alternative. Aside from MSIE, how do you do this? You can use the MS-proprietary commented if statements to provide alternate markup for various versions of IE, which is useful for making up for IE's inability to do things right, but what about Opera? Safari? Firefox pre-3.0? Is there a straightforward way, aside from a JavaScript user agent checker, to provide the different browsers different style info (or markup)? 1: IE/win is given some extra styles... http://www.gunlaug.no/contents/wd_additions_12.html ...and maybe even a conditional comment in the source-code. I mention this here since it my method for feeding styles to IE isn't used all that much. 2: My design-base is Opera, and if there are some disturbing deviations between Opera, Firefox and Safari then I usually manage to give them something they all agree on. My method involves giving all browsers complete source-code and CSS even if neither standards nor the best browsers requires it. I rarely ever hack these browsers for anything serious, although my old hacks seem to hold up quite well... http://www.gunlaug.no/contents/styles/target-browser.css I expect these hacks to break since they are based on unusual use of standard selectors. Hopefully the CSS support has grown to a reasonable level to across the board when that happens, in which case the hacks just become redundant. Have to watch all such hacks though, and be prepared to correct them. I suppose I should install Opera and Safari, too, but I just haven't bothered (and at least Opera is good enough with standards compliance that I wouldn't expect anything I'd be doing would break it. You should have all major browsers available for testing even if they are pretty close on most CSS related stuff. Firefox 3.0b1 doesn't look too bad so far, but Fx 2 is/was a bit behind. As a Windows user, Safari wasn't even a possibility until recently). IMO, Safari has been a bit weak when fed complex stuff, and the latest win-version doesn't seem too impressive either. Close enough for comfort though, and nice for testing some new stuff while waiting for the others. FWIW: I've decided not to upgrade my Mac, so it'll stay frozen in time with Safari 2.x until it dies of old age. It'll provide me with a platform to check other Mac-browsers on for a while, and I'm probably not the only one who won't upgrade Mac OS - for whatever reason. regards Georg -- http://www.gunlaug.no __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] How will firefox 3 affect web developers?
Gunlaug Sørtun wrote: Erik Harris wrote: I think Davoud's response shows us why the answer to the question posed in the subject is virtually nothing. There are too many people using other browsers, and unless we're going to be creating websites to work specifically in Firefox, we're still going to have to work with the lowest common denominator in the name of site, which has NEVER been Firefox, in the name of site stability. I think someone is defining site stability on the wrong premises. No site will ever work and render the same in all browsers, no matter what lowest common denominator one uses. Neither should they. Interesting... now I'm curious. While I don't have any major problem with (a little) different versions in different browsers (or mayor when so was desired), I see no reason why they *shouldn't* render the same, given that the content is the same. Was this some kind of typo or there's a reason behind it? Rafael. __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] How will firefox 3 affect web developers?
At 03:42 PM 11/29/2007, DAVOUD TOHIDY wrote: However your layout is not stable. For the definition of layout stability please see my portfolio at : I think Davoud's response shows us why the answer to the question posed in the subject is virtually nothing. There are too many people using other browsers, and unless we're going to be creating websites to work specifically in Firefox, we're still going to have to work with the lowest common denominator in the name of site, which has NEVER been Firefox, in the name of site stability. Most of the compromises I've made in my own web design efforts have been to account for Internet Explorer's inadequacies. Only once have I had to make a change because of a Firefox problem, where I found a completely valid CSS construct that crashed the Gecko rendering engine (I never revisited that construct, since there are always people out there who don't keep their browsers up to date, so even if the bug is fixed, I don't want to be crashing the browsers of people who don't bother keeping up to date). That the new Firefox can pass the acid stress test is really nice, but since we're talking about a browser that has, depending on who you ask, 5-15% of the browser market share, it really doesn't mean much to a web developer that isn't willing to spite everyone who uses inferior rendering engines. :) Hey, you're preaching to the choir! http://www.phazm.com/notes/productivity/stop-the-hate-ie6-isnt-so-bad/ I understand your point, but I disagree that it changes virtually nothing. While a lot of the functionality is essentially proprietary until other browsers support it (and obsolete browsers die) FF3 still has some good enhancements that will spur other browsers into a bit more action (not to mention, I think FF users will upgrade to the latest much faster than IE users) Things like getElementsByClassName are still useful, because if you run it with a library that supports it, it will simply speed the script up (because it doesn't have to traverse the DOM to find all class names, it can go directly to them) - So it is backwards compatible. Yes, handlers for protocols like validate:http://www.phazm.com/; are going to be somewhat useless for some time to come, but at least you can do things like setting up mailto: to go to another service instead of the users default. For the most part, I am thinking that the enhancements made will at the very least get some more market share for FF, and more people off IE6, and hopefully get IE to adopt some standards. - Jon __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] How will firefox 3 affect web developers?
At 03:42 PM 11/29/2007, DAVOUD TOHIDY wrote: However your layout is not stable. For the definition of layout stability please see my portfolio at : I think Davoud's response shows us why the answer to the question posed in the subject is virtually nothing. There are too many people using other browsers, and unless we're going to be creating websites to work specifically in Firefox, we're still going to have to work with the lowest common denominator in the name of site, which has NEVER been Firefox, in the name of site stability. Most of the compromises I've made in my own web design efforts have been to account for Internet Explorer's inadequacies. Only once have I had to make a change because of a Firefox problem, where I found a completely valid CSS construct that crashed the Gecko rendering engine (I never revisited that construct, since there are always people out there who don't keep their browsers up to date, so even if the bug is fixed, I don't want to be crashing the browsers of people who don't bother keeping up to date). That the new Firefox can pass the acid stress test is really nice, but since we're talking about a browser that has, depending on who you ask, 5-15% of the browser market share, it really doesn't mean much to a web developer that isn't willing to spite everyone who uses inferior rendering engines. :) Erik Harrishttp://www.eHarrisHome.com -AIM: KngFuJoe - Yahoo IM: kungfujoe7 - ICQ: 2610172- Chinese-Indonesian Martial Arts Club http://www.kungfu-silat.com __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] How will firefox 3 affect web developers?
However your layout is not stable. Yea, that's been something I've been wanting to fix but haven't had the time. My hard drive just crashed yesterday (thankfully I was able to restore most of the data) so as soon as it's back up, I'm going to strengthen my layout so it is scalable. Thanks for your input! - Jon Phazm.com/notes __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] How will firefox 3 affect web developers?
Erik Harris wrote: I think Davoud's response shows us why the answer to the question posed in the subject is virtually nothing. There are too many people using other browsers, and unless we're going to be creating websites to work specifically in Firefox, we're still going to have to work with the lowest common denominator in the name of site, which has NEVER been Firefox, in the name of site stability. I think someone is defining site stability on the wrong premises. No site will ever work and render the same in all browsers, no matter what lowest common denominator one uses. Neither should they. That sites created today should work reasonably well in the lowest common denominator we know of today - IE6/7, is a given. That doesn't, and shouldn't, prevent anyone from stretching their work/creations/sites as far as they possibly can in the leading browsers, and whatever other software they can think of. Firefox 3 is as good a target as any in that respect. Sites _should work_ on all essential points when put under a reasonable amount of stress (by non-broken features) in all major browsers, and preferably in most minor browsers too. That's essentially all the stability a site need, and getting the rest stable is for people (clients maybe) who like to compare details across browser-land - and the browser-developers. So, although Firefox 3 doesn't add much new to web design, what's there may be used for all it is worth - with complete disregard of what lesser browsers can handle but without breaking them. Lesser browsers can't handle more than their support-charts shows no matter what, so their users will not be missing anything by us providing more to users of the better browsers. FWIW: my lowest common denominator is Lynx, and I tailor my HTML/CSS to provide proper support for that, and other, decent non-CSS browsers. I never tailor a solution _for_ IE6/7 - I tailor IE6/7 for my solutions. regards Georg -- http://www.gunlaug.no __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] How will firefox 3 affect web developers?
Rafael wrote: Gunlaug Sørtun wrote: I think someone is defining site stability on the wrong premises. No site will ever work and render the same in all browsers, no matter what lowest common denominator one uses. Neither should they. Interesting... now I'm curious. Curiosity killed the cat... -- Molly 'the cat' :-) While I don't have any major problem with (a little) different versions in different browsers (or mayor when so was desired), I see no reason why they *shouldn't* render the same, given that the content is the same. Was this some kind of typo or there's a reason behind it? No typo, but rather a reaction to the lowest common denominator design-approach I responded to. I rarely ever see sites the way they are designed - stable or not. I don't expect them to, and the mentioned approach doesn't help one bit on the end-result. Of course, if one doesn't push anything anywhere, then one probably won't encounter many, if any, problems. However, defining site stability on a limited set of conditions, or on a limited set of browsers and use of browser-options, _is_ just a limitation with no guarantee for anything. Content being the same doesn't mean users get to or want to see it in the same way across the board, and that is often the reason why users learn about browser-options and/or switch browsers in order to get it right - for them. Thus, what the designer sees when comparing across browser-land and browser-options, and what an end-user sees, will only be the same by chance. Using a weak browser as lowest common denominator doesn't make sense at all when one adds in all the resulting variables even in the few browsers we usually regard as major, and holding back use of the latest implementations in any of the major browser for the sake of users that can't see it, makes (if possible) even less sense in this context. Browsers don't use the same engines and same calculations, and their set of options vary quite a bit. Sites designed with built-in stability limitations, doesn't help much on anything. Sites (meaning design here) should not be stable, they should adapt to the environment the very best they can - without disturbing the end-user. There is in reality no lowest common denominator to design for - maybe apart from the one called ignorance, only some common standards with plenty of play-room, common sense and varying degree of support. Add in the growing number of hardware variables and see the world evolve. Not much stability in there, and neither should there be if we want some progress. Some earlier thoughts related to the subject, for those who care to read articles on a, by definition, pretty unstable site... http://www.gunlaug.no/contents/wd_additions_21.html regards Georg -- http://www.gunlaug.no __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] How will firefox 3 affect web developers?
On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 06:58:55 -0800, Jon Hughes wrote:
[...]
Link:
http://www.phazm.com/notes/browser-compatibility/firefox-3-web-developers/
I would love feedback, as this is my first extensive post - is it
informative? Easy to
read? Useful?
Anything helps,
Informative, yes. Easy to read - not at my end, I fear.
You assume text size at default, large font Verdana globally
available and everyone's choice, and OS set to 96 DPI
resolution.
My end, I have a high definition laptop, set to 120 DPI, normal
for such displays. CODE elements display at 10 pixels - with
small caps, this is almost invisible. Large headings, on the other
hand, wrap and overlap due to the em sized line height.
Oh! And text in the About section spills into the margin at the
right, over the dark shadow area.
Increase text size in IE, and things get really hairy, due to the
em sized base font. Add this rule to your style sheet to
overcome the IE extreme font re-sizing bug:
html {font-size: 100%;}
As for content, you don't say whether FF 3 is available on Mac?
I Hope this helps.
Cordially,
David
--
__
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] How will firefox 3 affect web developers?
On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 06:58:55 -0800, Jon Hughes wrote: Link: http://www.phazm.com/notes/browser-compatibility/firefox-3-web-developers/ I would love feedback, as this is my first extensive post - is it informative? Easy to read? Useful? Just had a quick look. informative. Nice and clean design with good combination of colors, easy in the eye. I prefer a line hight more than what you are using though. I get a horizontal blue line over your menu in FF 1.0.7, didn't have the time to find out what it is. You might want to check that out. However your layout is not stable. For the definition of layout stability please see my portfolio at : http://cssfreelancer.awardspace.com . best davoud _ Have fun while connecting on Messenger! Click here to learn more. http://entertainment.sympatico.msn.ca/WindowsLiveMessenger __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] How will firefox 3 affect web developers?
At 11:31 -0800 on 11/29/2007, David Hucklesby wrote about Re: [css-d] How will firefox 3 affect web developers?: As for content, you don't say whether FF 3 is available on Mac? Yes. -- Bob Rosenberg RockMUG Webmaster [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.RockMUG.org __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] How will firefox 3 affect web developers?
On 2007/11/30 01:38 (GMT-0500) Bob Rosenberg apparently typed: At 11:31 -0800 on 11/29/2007, David Hucklesby wrote: How will firefox 3 affect web developers?: As for content, you don't say whether FF 3 is available on Mac? Yes. And no. FF3 requires OS components missing from Panther and prior Mac OS versions. http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/system-requirements-v3.html -- A patriot without religion . . . is as great a paradox, as an honest man without the fear of God. John Adams Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/ __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
