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
... 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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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.
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
- 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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
I just finished a blog post which gives an overview of the things that web
developer/designers should be aware of.
FTA:
[...]Since Mozilla released the Firefox 3 Beta (Code Name: Minefield) there
have been a rash of blog posts regarding the many new features, increased
security, and enhanced UI.
33 matches
Mail list logo
