Andrew Krespanis wrote:
"OOPS! I just swore on listSORRY :)"
---
LOL.
First time a long while I've actually gotten a laugh from this list.
Cheers,
Mike Pepper
Accessible Web Developer
Internet SEO and Marketing Analyst
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.visidigm.com
Administrator
Guild of Acce
OOPS! I just swore on list
SORRY :)
http://leftjustified.net/
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the
> Well I suggest you name names and show examples of compliant html 4.01 that
> doesn't show 100% of the intented content and doesn't at least resemble like
> what you intented.
Compliant html pages styled completely with CSS displaying bugs? Easy,
I would make some examples for you now if I wasn't
On Tue February 8 2005 09:22, Andrew Krespanis wrote:
> What kind of make believe web do you design for? Every day I deal with
> horribly incorrect (according to spec) rendering across all but the
> latest of browsers -- and before you respond, I can assure you the
> code in question is clean as dr
On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 07:06:21 +0100, Andy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If your code is compliant then just about every browser out there will be
> able to generate
> it with a 90% accuracy regarding design and 100% accuracy regarding content.
What kind of make believe web do you design for? Ever
Hi
Altough others may use other standards, I for one don't care all that much
about browser percentage. HTML 4 exists more then 10 years now and users with
browsers that don't understand HTML 4 can't be all that interested in your
site anyway.
So with this in mind, I set my doctype to 4.01 tra
> This is more of a general standards question, but if you are designing a
> page for the public in general (in my case a university) at what point (
> % wise _or_ # of browsers) do you say 'Okay this is the site, no more
> trying to accommodate obscure browsers/older versions of browsers." ? I
> k
On Mon, 07 Feb 2005 10:03:30 -0330, Paul wrote:
> This is more of a general standards question, but if you are designing a
> page for the public in general (in my case a university) at what point (
> % wise _or_ # of browsers) do you say 'Okay this is the site, no more
> trying to accommodate obscu
On Mon, 07 Feb 2005 23:57:06 +0800, Bert Doorn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Really depends on the audience, the client, etc but I usually draw the
line at "5th generation" browsers (MSIE5+, Opera 5+, Netscape 6/7,
Firefox, Mozilla, Safari, etc)
You can totally ignore Opera 5 and 6.
92% of Opera u
Paul wrote:
This is more of a general standards question, but if you are
designing a page for the public in general (in my case a university)
at what point ( % wise _or_ # of browsers) do you say 'Okay this is
the site, no more trying to accommodate obscure browsers/older
versions of browsers."
G'day
Paul wrote:
This is more of a general standards question, but if you are designing a
page for the public in general (in my case a university) at what point (
% wise _or_ # of browsers) do you say 'Okay this is the site, no more
trying to accommodate obscure browsers/older versions of browsers
11 matches
Mail list logo
