Re: [WSG] Code for Firefox, hack for IE

[Breton Slivka]

On Mon, Sep 1, 2008 at 8:55 PM, David McKinnon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> For a while now, I've been operating on the principle "Code for Firefox,
> hack for IE".
>
> That is, writing CSS for the most standards-compliant browser, and then
> making adjustments for non-standard behaviour.
> I said this in a meeting last week to argue a point and my boss said "who
> says?".
>
> I could have said "me", but maybe that's not a good enough answer.
> Somewhere some years ago I read this, or heard someone at a conference or
> something and it got stuck in my head.
>
> Is this the way anyone works?
> Is it the best way to work?
> Does anyone know where I got this idea from? Book? Blog? A bit of googling
> this afternoon turned up not very much.
>
> Thanks,
> David


I think that nobody has to have said it. It is simply a fact that is
the easiest way to code. If you need an expert to tell you which way
is best then you probably haven't tried it the other way around.

Let me frame it in a metaphore. You're a teacher with 4 students, 3 of
them are really good students, but the fourth is kind of slow, and has
difficulty understanding instructions, and is frequently found making
up his own little engish dailecs 4 u 2 reed.  What approach would you
take with this class? Do you start out by writing out the lesson in
the dumbed down dialect, and hope that you don't bring down the level
of the whole class by doing so? Or do you write the lesson in well
structured english, and put dumbed down parentheticals to explain the
difficult parts for the slow kid?

In short, IE is a bad, outdated, dumb browser, and if you code for IE
first, you run the risk of writing in a browser ebonics that make your
pages look dumb to the other browsers, and you end up using slang
words that none of the other browsers can understand properly.  it's
better to target the standards compliant browsers first (the ones that
agree on a single language), and then dumb it down for the dumb
browser.

So, an appeal to an authority figure on this matter is not necessary.
One only needs to look at the facts- And the evidence of the rather
tenuous position many large companies now find themselves in when they
can't upgrade from internet explorer 6 because all their intranet
pages were authored to work ONLY in IE6. This is a tenuous position,
because of the gaping security deficits in IE6 that put any large
deployment in dire risk. sooner or later MS is going to stop
supporting IE6, and then where will they be?

So there's another argument: It's better to code to standards, because
to depend on a single browser from a single company for your large
investment is foolish.

I'm sure you can come up with your own arguments, but yeah, it's also
just easier to code in firefox first and then hack for IE. Firefox has
fewer bugs, and is updated more frequently, and isn't trying to hold
onto an illegal monopoly by pushing mutually indecipherable dialects,
as microsoft does and continues to do.


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

[WSG] Google chrome... Coming very soon...

[russ - maxdesign]

Some of the many comments about the proposed new Google browser...

http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/09/fresh-take-on-browser.html

http://blogoscoped.com/google-chrome/

http://blogoscoped.com/archive/2008-09-01-n47.html

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17939_109-10029914-2.html

http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/google_to_offer_its_own_browser_chrome.
php

http://www.smh.com.au/news/biztech/new-google-browser-to-muscle-in-on-micros
oft/2008/09/02/1220121183420.html

Thanks
Russ




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Code for Firefox, hack for IE

[Al Sparber]

From: "willdonovan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


I thought that was the case but does it render the same.

FF renders quite differently I find across PC, Mac and Lynx.


Safari does have some bugs (what browser doesn't?) but, in my experience, 
the largest area of concern for certain types of layouts, is in how 
differently Safari renders text. Its font-smoothing marches to a much 
different drummer :-) A case in point would be a floated menu list without a 
defined width for each LI (or width set in ems). The list will be 
signifantly wider in Safari.


As for the original question, it's usually better to code to standards. 
Addressing IE can be easy or hard, depending on experience level. After a 
while IE bugs become second nature... resulting in a "hack as you go" type 
of workflow.


--
Al Sparber - PVII
http://www.projectseven.com
Fully Automated Menu Systems | Galleries | Widgets
http://www.projectseven.com/go/Elevators




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Code for Firefox, hack for IE

[willdonovan]

I thought that was the case but does it render the same.

FF renders quite differently I find across PC, Mac and Lynx.

William



Nathan de Vries wrote:

On Mon, 2008-09-01 at 22:09 +1000, willdonovan wrote:
  
I do find that Opera can give a good idea of what might be happening 
with Safari if your a PC user...



Safari has been available for Windows for a little while now.

--
Nathan de Vries


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
  



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Code for Firefox, hack for IE

[Nathan de Vries]

On Mon, 2008-09-01 at 22:09 +1000, willdonovan wrote:
> I do find that Opera can give a good idea of what might be happening 
> with Safari if your a PC user...

Safari has been available for Windows for a little while now.

--
Nathan de Vries


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

[WSG] Facebook downgrading support for IE6

[Susie Gardner-Brown]

I came upon this - 
http://www.kryogenix.org/days/2008/08/27/facebook-doesnt-really-support-ie6

If Facebook (or the Œnew¹ Facebook look) is doing this, maybe it will really
start to move IE6 out the door ...

One can only hope anyway!!

+++
Susie Gardner-Brown
blog:  http://susiegb/blogspot.com
web: http://www.greendoorwebsites.com



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

RE: [WSG] doctype validation and jello layout in ie issues

[Essential eBiz Solutions Ltd]

You need to put the doc type before the HTML and HEAD tags. Also your css
file isn't pointed correctly when you go to the locations page needs the
good old .. to make it look back a folder.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of kevin mcmonagle
Sent: 01 September 2008 23:56
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: [WSG] doctype validation and jello layout in ie issues

Hi im developing a site and have a couple problems.

www.pattersonskitchens.ie

First I cant get the doctype to validate, not sure why

2nd: cant get the expanding/repeating background div on left hand side 
to work in ie.

theres a few other issues but these are the two that have me stuck.


-best
kevin





***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



-- 
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG. 
Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.6.14/1644 - Release Date: 31/08/2008
16:59




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] doctype validation and jello layout in ie issues

[Luke Hoggett]

Hi,

the doctype belongs outside the  and  tags.

also you probably won't get it to validate with  tags wrapped around 
individual elements of a definition list


cheers
Luke

kevin mcmonagle wrote:

Hi im developing a site and have a couple problems.

www.pattersonskitchens.ie

First I cant get the doctype to validate, not sure why

2nd: cant get the expanding/repeating background div on left hand side 
to work in ie.


theres a few other issues but these are the two that have me stuck.


-best
kevin





***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***





***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

[WSG] doctype validation and jello layout in ie issues

[kevin mcmonagle]

Hi im developing a site and have a couple problems.

www.pattersonskitchens.ie

First I cant get the doctype to validate, not sure why

2nd: cant get the expanding/repeating background div on left hand side 
to work in ie.


theres a few other issues but these are the two that have me stuck.


-best
kevin





***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Code for Firefox, hack for IE

[David Hucklesby]

On Mon, 1 Sep 2008 20:55:07 +1000, David McKinnon wrote:
>
> For a while now, I've been operating on the principle "Code for Firefox, hack 
> for IE".
>

Interesting thread.

I learned CSS from "Eric Meyer on CSS" books. He gives several ideas
for avoiding browser bugs and related hacks altogether.

FWIW - I assist at a web design class for adults. The teacher advises
students to target IE (6) first, her rationale being that potential
employers are likely to use it. But I find so very many students get
frustrated, reaching an impasse when they can't get their "working"
IE code to display the same way in other browsers. Indeed, the teacher
recently asked my help to "fix a bug in Opera" when a hack failed 
to work in that browser.

A few years ago, before Firebug came out, I designed first for Opera.
However, this got a bit frustrating when learning CSS, because Opera
recognized far more CSS than any other browser !

With the recent spate of browser releases, we now have highly
conformant versions of Firefox, Opera, and Safari, each with their
own set of tools. With all this goodness, I feel like a kid in
a candy store!

But I have a confession - I am so pleased that the World's Favorite
Browser exists, or I wouldn't be able to charge so much. ;)

Cordially,
David
--



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

[WSG] Lisa Kerrigan/StateDevPolicy/DSD is out of the office.

[lisa . kerrigan]

I will be out of the office starting  02/09/2008 and will not return until
03/09/2008.

For Content Requests contact Jason Rhodes. For all other queries, contact
Wendy Pryor


**
Department of Innovation, Industry and Regional Development, 
Government of Victoria, Victoria, Australia.  

This e-mail and any attachments may contain privileged and confidential
information.   If you are not the intended recipient, you may not distribute
reproduce this e-mail or the attachments.   If you have received this message
in error, please notify us by return e-mail.

**



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Code for Firefox, hack for IE

[Joseph Taylor]

My 2 cents:

I've been coding CSS layouts since 2003.  I've probably laid out several 
hundred sites at this point.


Today, I always code on FF first (yes for the tools).  Yes, Opera 
renders a little more accurately.  Once you learn little CSS tricks to 
stabilize floated items, their containers etc your pages should look 
good in Opera and Safari first run when coded on FF.


Once you learn the troublespots in IE (widths with padding, dealing with 
heights) they're easy to spot and fix.  Many of the issues can be solved 
by one extra element in your html (or one less depending).


Best way to troubleshoot if you haven't dealt with all the bugs is to 
remove stuff from your page until you can isolate your trouble spot.


Joseph R. B. Taylor
/Designer / Developer/
--
Sites by Joe, LLC
/"Clean, Simple and Elegant Web Design"/
Phone: (609) 335-3076
Fax: (866) 301-8045
Web: http://sitesbyjoe.com
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



huzairy rezuan wrote:
I think that I've read about this in Andy Clarke's Transcending CSS 
book. Maybe it's under the Progressive Enhancement approach.


On Mon, Sep 1, 2008 at 9:24 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> wrote:


Hi David,

I wouldnt say that I code for Firefox, more that I code in
immaculate standards compliant code and that it seems to work best
in Firefox, Safari and Opera ;)

You are right though - make for standard complient browsers and
then use conditional statements for IE. Most of the time these are
to fix very minimal spacing issues.

This isnt much but this article on sitepoint defines that firefox
is the browser for web developers:
http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2008/08/29/would-you-switch-to-ie8/

Darren Lovelock
Munkyonline.co.uk 


Quoting David McKinnon <[EMAIL PROTECTED] >:

Hi,

For a while now, I've been operating on the principle "Code for
Firefox, hack for IE".

That is, writing CSS for the most standards-compliant browser,
and then
making adjustments for non-standard behaviour.
I said this in a meeting last week to argue a point and my
boss said
"who says?".

I could have said "me", but maybe that's not a good enough answer.
Somewhere some years ago I read this, or heard someone at a
conference
or something and it got stuck in my head.

Is this the way anyone works?
Is it the best way to work?
Does anyone know where I got this idea from? Book? Blog? A bit of
googling this afternoon turned up not very much.

Thanks,
David

***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

***





***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

***



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*** 



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Code for Firefox, hack for IE

[huzairy rezuan]

I think that I've read about this in Andy Clarke's Transcending CSS book.
Maybe it's under the Progressive Enhancement approach.

On Mon, Sep 1, 2008 at 9:24 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Hi David,
>
> I wouldnt say that I code for Firefox, more that I code in immaculate
> standards compliant code and that it seems to work best in Firefox, Safari
> and Opera ;)
>
> You are right though - make for standard complient browsers and then use
> conditional statements for IE. Most of the time these are to fix very
> minimal spacing issues.
>
> This isnt much but this article on sitepoint defines that firefox is the
> browser for web developers:
> http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2008/08/29/would-you-switch-to-ie8/
>
> Darren Lovelock
> Munkyonline.co.uk
>
>
> Quoting David McKinnon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>  Hi,
>>
>> For a while now, I've been operating on the principle "Code for
>> Firefox, hack for IE".
>>
>> That is, writing CSS for the most standards-compliant browser, and then
>> making adjustments for non-standard behaviour.
>> I said this in a meeting last week to argue a point and my boss said
>> "who says?".
>>
>> I could have said "me", but maybe that's not a good enough answer.
>> Somewhere some years ago I read this, or heard someone at a conference
>> or something and it got stuck in my head.
>>
>> Is this the way anyone works?
>> Is it the best way to work?
>> Does anyone know where I got this idea from? Book? Blog? A bit of
>> googling this afternoon turned up not very much.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> David
>>
>> ***
>> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
>> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
>> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> ***
>>
>
>
>
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***
>
>


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Code for Firefox, hack for IE

[info]

Hi David,

I wouldnt say that I code for Firefox, more that I code in immaculate  
standards compliant code and that it seems to work best in Firefox,  
Safari and Opera ;)


You are right though - make for standard complient browsers and then  
use conditional statements for IE. Most of the time these are to fix  
very minimal spacing issues.


This isnt much but this article on sitepoint defines that firefox is  
the browser for web developers:

http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2008/08/29/would-you-switch-to-ie8/

Darren Lovelock
Munkyonline.co.uk

Quoting David McKinnon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:


Hi,

For a while now, I've been operating on the principle "Code for
Firefox, hack for IE".

That is, writing CSS for the most standards-compliant browser, and then
making adjustments for non-standard behaviour.
I said this in a meeting last week to argue a point and my boss said
"who says?".

I could have said "me", but maybe that's not a good enough answer.
Somewhere some years ago I read this, or heard someone at a conference
or something and it got stuck in my head.

Is this the way anyone works?
Is it the best way to work?
Does anyone know where I got this idea from? Book? Blog? A bit of
googling this afternoon turned up not very much.

Thanks,
David

***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***





***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Code for Firefox, hack for IE

[Rick Lecoat]

On 1 Sep 2008, at 12:27, Ben Buchanan wrote:

I use basically the same approach, but I code for Opera; checking in  
Firefox and Safari. Then hack for IE at the end. On very large  
builds I do the occasional check for IE as well just to make sure  
things haven't gone really badly wrong in IE in some unpredictable  
way.


Same here, more or less.

My coding environment is Coda on a Mac, which provides a constant  
webkit-based preview on the fly. That pretty much takes care of Safari  
(mac). Then I make frequent checks in FF and Opera to make sure that  
there are no inconsistencies, with FF probably taking priority over  
Opera because of its handy development add-ons.


Lastly, I make occasional trips to IE 6/7/8 to check out that  
browser's own 'exciting' take on things. These tend to be required  
more frequently in the early stages of page construction when the  
basic structure is being laid down. That is the time that I most  
commonly run afoul of IE bugs and/or Trident idiosyncrasies. I try to  
correct these as I go rather than waiting until the end because  
otherwise it can be much harder to trace the root of a problem.


On 1 Sep 2008, at 13:30, willdonovan wrote:

I find that if I'm attempting to make the site cross browser, try  
not to make the CSS too complicated.


I agree. Keeping the CSS simple and thus maintaining the page in  
'standards mode' means that many of the IE box model problems can be  
avoided. Unless I have an overly complex page design I can generally  
avoid most IE hacks altogether (although I still add in things like  
display:inline for floated content)

--
Rick Lecoat
www.sharkattack.co.uk



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Code for Firefox, hack for IE

[willdonovan]

I started learning hacks, and now don't use them at all.

I find that if I'm attempting to make the site cross browser, try not to 
make the CSS too complicated.


William

David Storey wrote:
If coding for the most standards compliant browser, then hack for IE, 
then you wouldn't code for FF first.  Maybe third.


It however comes with the best developer tools on the market, which 
makes it easier to developer for, and that comes from someone that is 
working as the product manager for Opera Dragonfly.  We are working to 
catch up with and surpass the likes of Firebug and friends, but we are 
not there yet.


It is probably best in my opinion to develop while checking in at 
least two of the major none-IE/Trident browsers engines (preferably 
three), especially after making major changes, just to make sure you 
are not relying on a browser bug or a vendor specific property.  Then 
make it work for IE using conditional comments, as they are much less 
frail than css hacks and browser sniffing.  With CC's you can override 
the properties IE gets incorrect or doesn't support by using the CSS 
cascade, and you never have to worry about them affecting the other 
browsers.


On 1 Sep 2008, at 12:55, David McKinnon wrote:


Hi,

For a while now, I've been operating on the principle "Code for 
Firefox, hack for IE".


That is, writing CSS for the most standards-compliant browser, and 
then making adjustments for non-standard behaviour.
I said this in a meeting last week to argue a point and my boss said 
"who says?".


I could have said "me", but maybe that's not a good enough answer.
Somewhere some years ago I read this, or heard someone at a 
conference or something and it got stuck in my head.


Is this the way anyone works?
Is it the best way to work?
Does anyone know where I got this idea from? Book? Blog? A bit of 
googling this afternoon turned up not very much.


Thanks,
David

***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***


David Storey

Chief Web Opener,
Product Manager Opera Dragonfly,
Consumer Product Manager Opera Core,
W3C Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group member

Consumer Product Management & Developer Relations
Opera Software ASA
Oslo, Norway

Mobile: +47 94 22 02 32
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Blog: http://my.opera.com/dstorey








***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***





***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Code for Firefox, hack for IE

[willdonovan]

I would have to agree with the others here.

Coding for / with FF is easier because of the debugging tools (i.e. 
Firebug, Web Developer Toolbar, etc)


Otherwise I have atleast 4 other browsers open, all the popular IE's 
(5.5, 6, 7 & soon 8) and Opera.


I do find that Opera can give a good idea of what might be happening 
with Safari if your a PC user, but do check from time to time, like 
after major fixes and development stages.


William

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

This is how I work, but mainly for pragmatic reasons:
Better JavaScript de-bugging tools in FireFox.
Better CSS support, therefore fewer problems out of the box, and better
stylesheet analysis tools.
Finally, the one good reason: anything that needs to be fixed for IE can
be done with conditional comments, no such luck if you do things the
other way around.

Regards,
Mike

  

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David McKinnon

Sent: Monday, September 01, 2008 11:55 AM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: [WSG] Code for Firefox, hack for IE

Hi,

For a while now, I've been operating on the principle "Code 
for Firefox, hack for IE".


That is, writing CSS for the most standards-compliant browser, 
and then making adjustments for non-standard behaviour.
I said this in a meeting last week to argue a point and my 
boss said "who says?".


I could have said "me", but maybe that's not a good enough answer.
Somewhere some years ago I read this, or heard someone at a 
conference or something and it got stuck in my head.


Is this the way anyone works?
Is it the best way to work?
Does anyone know where I got this idea from? Book? Blog? A bit 
of googling this afternoon turned up not very much.


Thanks,
David 







***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



  



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Code for Firefox, hack for IE

[Gunlaug Sørtun]

David McKinnon wrote:
For a while now, I've been operating on the principle "Code for 
Firefox, hack for IE".



Is this the way anyone works?


Apart from that I "code for the most standard compliant browsers
(plural) at present time, and then hack for various IE versions", I
think I'll go along with your principle.

FWIW: Firefox (3.01) is third on my list of reasonable compliant
browsers at the moment.


Is it the best way to work?


Well, it is rather time-consuming and impractical to "code for IE and
then hack for the other browsers", so I think you got that about right
too :-)

Does anyone know where I got this idea from? Book? Blog? A bit of 
googling this afternoon turned up not very much.


Maybe on this old note...


regards
Georg
--
http://www.gunlaug.no


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

RE: [WSG] Code for Firefox, hack for IE

[Essential eBiz Solutions Ltd]

I would say code for standards at the end of the day, because standard is
really the minimum requirement, once that's ticked off then code/hack for
other browsers. Can't say I've read it anywhere but my web sites certainly
look, work and load a lot better since I've started following that process.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of David McKinnon
Sent: 01 September 2008 11:55
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: [WSG] Code for Firefox, hack for IE

Hi,

For a while now, I've been operating on the principle "Code for  
Firefox, hack for IE".

That is, writing CSS for the most standards-compliant browser, and  
then making adjustments for non-standard behaviour.
I said this in a meeting last week to argue a point and my boss said  
"who says?".

I could have said "me", but maybe that's not a good enough answer.
Somewhere some years ago I read this, or heard someone at a conference  
or something and it got stuck in my head.

Is this the way anyone works?
Is it the best way to work?
Does anyone know where I got this idea from? Book? Blog? A bit of  
googling this afternoon turned up not very much.

Thanks,
David 


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



-- 
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG. 
Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.6.14/1644 - Release Date: 31/08/2008
16:59




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Code for Firefox, hack for IE

[kevin_erickson]

I have also read and believe that you code correctly and, yes, the browsers 
that are web standard compliant should not need any hacks. However there will 
most likely be the need for IE6 hacks.

--- Original Message ---
From:David McKinnon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent:Mon 9/1/08  6:55 am
To:wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subj:[WSG] Code for Firefox, hack for IE

Hi,

For a while now, I've been operating on the principle "Code for  
Firefox, hack for IE".

That is, writing CSS for the most standards-compliant browser, and  
then making adjustments for non-standard behaviour.
I said this in a meeting last week to argue a point and my boss said  
"who says?".

I could have said "me", but maybe that's not a good enough answer.
Somewhere some years ago I read this, or heard someone at a conference  
or something and it got stuck in my head.

Is this the way anyone works?
Is it the best way to work?
Does anyone know where I got this idea from? Book? Blog? A bit of  
googling this afternoon turned up not very much.

Thanks,
David 


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***





***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Code for Firefox, hack for IE

[Ben Buchanan]

For a while now, I've been operating on the principle "Code for Firefox,
> hack for IE".
>
That is, writing CSS for the most standards-compliant browser, and then
> making adjustments for non-standard behaviour.
>
Is this the way anyone works?
>
Is it the best way to work?
>
I use basically the same approach, but I code for Opera; checking in Firefox
and Safari. Then hack for IE at the end. On very large builds I do the
occasional check for IE as well just to make sure things haven't gone really
badly wrong in IE in some unpredictable way.

I don't think you should "code for firefox" though. That's no better than
"coding for IE" since you're just coding for a specific browser. A much
better way to operate is "coding for standards compliant browsers" (or at
least those browsers with the strongest standards support). I would
recommend you broaden your initial testing to include Opera and Safari as
well - they generally agree anyway but it's better to be thorough.

If your boss really questions this you can always point out that building
and testing in the better browsers is much faster. Most people find it is
more efficient to get things working in the good browsers then do one round
of hacking at the end for IE. I know I find it more efficient that way.

You just have to get clients/etc to do their previews in something other
than IE :)

cheers,

Ben

-- 
--- 
--- The future has arrived; it's just not
--- evenly distributed. - William Gibson


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Code for Firefox, hack for IE

[David Storey]

If coding for the most standards compliant browser, then hack for IE,  
then you wouldn't code for FF first.  Maybe third.


It however comes with the best developer tools on the market, which  
makes it easier to developer for, and that comes from someone that is  
working as the product manager for Opera Dragonfly.  We are working to  
catch up with and surpass the likes of Firebug and friends, but we are  
not there yet.


It is probably best in my opinion to develop while checking in at  
least two of the major none-IE/Trident browsers engines (preferably  
three), especially after making major changes, just to make sure you  
are not relying on a browser bug or a vendor specific property.  Then  
make it work for IE using conditional comments, as they are much less  
frail than css hacks and browser sniffing.  With CC's you can override  
the properties IE gets incorrect or doesn't support by using the CSS  
cascade, and you never have to worry about them affecting the other  
browsers.


On 1 Sep 2008, at 12:55, David McKinnon wrote:


Hi,

For a while now, I've been operating on the principle "Code for  
Firefox, hack for IE".


That is, writing CSS for the most standards-compliant browser, and  
then making adjustments for non-standard behaviour.
I said this in a meeting last week to argue a point and my boss said  
"who says?".


I could have said "me", but maybe that's not a good enough answer.
Somewhere some years ago I read this, or heard someone at a  
conference or something and it got stuck in my head.


Is this the way anyone works?
Is it the best way to work?
Does anyone know where I got this idea from? Book? Blog? A bit of  
googling this afternoon turned up not very much.


Thanks,
David

***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***


David Storey

Chief Web Opener,
Product Manager Opera Dragonfly,
Consumer Product Manager Opera Core,
W3C Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group member

Consumer Product Management & Developer Relations
Opera Software ASA
Oslo, Norway

Mobile: +47 94 22 02 32
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Blog: http://my.opera.com/dstorey








***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

RE: [WSG] Code for Firefox, hack for IE

[michael.brockington]

This is how I work, but mainly for pragmatic reasons:
Better JavaScript de-bugging tools in FireFox.
Better CSS support, therefore fewer problems out of the box, and better
stylesheet analysis tools.
Finally, the one good reason: anything that needs to be fixed for IE can
be done with conditional comments, no such luck if you do things the
other way around.

Regards,
Mike

>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David McKinnon
>Sent: Monday, September 01, 2008 11:55 AM
>To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
>Subject: [WSG] Code for Firefox, hack for IE
>
>Hi,
>
>For a while now, I've been operating on the principle "Code 
>for Firefox, hack for IE".
>
>That is, writing CSS for the most standards-compliant browser, 
>and then making adjustments for non-standard behaviour.
>I said this in a meeting last week to argue a point and my 
>boss said "who says?".
>
>I could have said "me", but maybe that's not a good enough answer.
>Somewhere some years ago I read this, or heard someone at a 
>conference or something and it got stuck in my head.
>
>Is this the way anyone works?
>Is it the best way to work?
>Does anyone know where I got this idea from? Book? Blog? A bit 
>of googling this afternoon turned up not very much.
>
>Thanks,
>David 
>
>


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Code for Firefox, hack for IE

[Rob Enslin]

Hi David,

Good question you raise.

This's how I've been working for years - design for the most
standards-compliant browser, FF.
Could it be that we code for FF because it's easier to debug (Firebug)?
Or perhaps, that most designers hear of/read articles about IE hacks
assuming that it's the least compliant?

I'd be interested if anyone can 'validate' this argument as I'm sure a lot
of designers are of the same opinion.

Rob

2008/9/1 David McKinnon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

> Hi,
>
> For a while now, I've been operating on the principle "Code for Firefox,
> hack for IE".
>
> That is, writing CSS for the most standards-compliant browser, and then
> making adjustments for non-standard behaviour.
> I said this in a meeting last week to argue a point and my boss said "who
> says?".
>
> I could have said "me", but maybe that's not a good enough answer.
> Somewhere some years ago I read this, or heard someone at a conference or
> something and it got stuck in my head.
>
> Is this the way anyone works?
> Is it the best way to work?
> Does anyone know where I got this idea from? Book? Blog? A bit of googling
> this afternoon turned up not very much.
>
> Thanks,
> David
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***
>
>


-- 
/ Rob Enslin
/ enslin.co.uk
/ twitter.com/robenslin
/ +44759 052 8890


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

[WSG] Code for Firefox, hack for IE

[David McKinnon]

Hi,

For a while now, I've been operating on the principle "Code for  
Firefox, hack for IE".


That is, writing CSS for the most standards-compliant browser, and  
then making adjustments for non-standard behaviour.
I said this in a meeting last week to argue a point and my boss said  
"who says?".


I could have said "me", but maybe that's not a good enough answer.
Somewhere some years ago I read this, or heard someone at a conference  
or something and it got stuck in my head.


Is this the way anyone works?
Is it the best way to work?
Does anyone know where I got this idea from? Book? Blog? A bit of  
googling this afternoon turned up not very much.


Thanks,
David 



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Figures out issues. Standards for troubleshooting css

[designer]

Hi Mike (and all),

I also find "outline : 1px dashed #f00;" very useful as, unlike 'border' it 
doesn't add any extra pixels. (However, It doesn't work in IE, of course.)


Bob

www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk


- Original Message - 
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Sent: Monday, September 01, 2008 9:57 AM
Subject: RE: [WSG] Figures out issues. Standards for troubleshooting css


Many people have some sort of reset stylesheet, that turns on a border for 
every div or every element. The 'perfect' version of this idea can get very 
complex, but something as simple as setting a border on all divs can often 
show you where something is stretching or floating where you were not 
expecting.


Mike 





***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

RE: [WSG] E649: The default scripting language must be specified for an intrinsic event:

[michael.brockington]

I think you will find that this has no direct effect on accessibility.
As I am sure you know, if you rely on these methods for navigation, or
if that select isn't made keyboard-friendly, then that is a problem, but
inline JavaScript on its own is fine. In some circumstances it is better
to have it as an external script file, but only for management reasons,
not for operational reasons, if that makes sense?

Similarly, I think you can afford to ignore that validation warning - I
have yet to come across a browser that tries to run JavaScript as
anything else.

Regards,
Mike

Mike Brockington
Web Development Specialist

www.calcResult.com
www.stephanieBlakey.me.uk
www.edinburgh.gov.uk

This message does not reflect the opinions of any entity other than the
author alone.

>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of tee
>Sent: Sunday, August 31, 2008 1:07 AM
>To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
>Subject: [WSG] E649: The default scripting language must be 
>specified for an intrinsic event:
>
>I looked up the reference from W3C, but all I got is a blurry 
>picture that makes my head spins.
>
>I added a meta tag:
>
>
>No effect.
>
>
>Example of offenders.
>
>   onchange="window.location.href=this.value">
>
>   onmouseout="toggleMenu(this, 0)">
>
>
>So my question, what fatal effect it has for accessibility if I can't  
>get rid of them?
>
>Thanks!
>
>tee
>
>
>
>
>
>***
>List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
>Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
>Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>***
>
>


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

RE: [WSG] Figures out issues. Standards for troubleshooting css

[michael.brockington]

Many people have some sort of reset stylesheet, that turns on a border
for every div or every element. The 'perfect' version of this idea can
get very complex, but something as simple as setting a border on all
divs can often show you where something is stretching or floating where
you were not expecting.
 
Mike
 
Mike Brockington
Web Development Specialist

www.calcResult.com
www.stephanieBlakey.me.uk
www.edinburgh.gov.uk

This message does not reflect the opinions of any entity other than the
author alone. 

 



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***