Mordechai,
I can't speak for everybody, but as the person responsible for designing and
creating websites whose sole purpose is to bring new business into the
company; my main focus is the majority that comes to our sites. The
overwhelming majority (about 70%) of visitors use MSIE 5/6. If I have
As a person, you can of course say fuck you to IE, but as a web
professional I find it impossible to ignore it. [ Ben de Groot -
http://mathibus.com/archives/2004/10/02/phpss/#comment-3 ]
On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 09:52:46 -0600, Collin Davis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mordechai,
I can't speak for
On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 17:46:56 +0100, Mathias Bynens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As a person, you can of course say fuck you to IE, but as a web
professional I find it impossible to ignore it. [ Ben de Groot -
http://mathibus.com/archives/2004/10/02/phpss/#comment-3 ]
It's totally true. IE is a
If you make commercial sites you must live with the fact that it is mainly
for IE.
Loudest f. you I can tell to IE is Firebar:
http://hpstudios.homeip.net/Firebar.html
Usually I don't have to trash the code with conditional comments.
* html {}
and
* {}
css hacks are enough.
I try to make pages
Collin Davis wrote:
I can't speak for everybody, but as the person responsible for designing and
creating websites whose sole purpose is to bring new business into the
company; my main focus is the majority that comes to our sites.
As I though I explained before, and as I'll try to clarify some
: [WSG] Why style to IE?
I don't believe Mordechai was suggesting anyone ignore IE -- rather
that, instead of bashing our heads against the proverbial brick wall
trying to make our standards-compliant sites work in IE, it may be a
workable option to use an alternative to said head bashing and css
Right on, Vicki. Additionally, conditional comments are not blocked in IE
--as is JavaScript-- if the user has her Security setting at High.
David
On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 01:15:12 +0800, Vicki Berry
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't believe Mordechai was suggesting anyone ignore IE -- rather
Mordechai Pellar wrote:
So you limit yourself to what NN4.x and can handle? It was NN4.x and
older browsers that the phrase unstyled or lightly styled was
directed, unless you consider CSS dumb down to IE standards (admittedly,
that usually amounts to no more than a slight margin, but a
Mordechai Peller wrote:
I know there's a certain degree of revulsion to using JavaScript, but
that's because it wasn't used properly. It's a very powerful language,
and when combined with the DOM, and used responsibly, it can do many
wonderful things.
--
I agree with you
Sent: Monday, December 27, 2004 11:15 AM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Why style to IE?
I don't believe Mordechai was suggesting anyone ignore IE -- rather
that, instead of bashing our heads against the proverbial brick wall
trying to make our standards-compliant sites work
Collin Davis wrote:
The bashing of head against the proverbial brick wall comes from trying to make
my standards-compliant sites work the same in FF/Opera/NN/Safari as they do in
IE. I first make sure the sites look and perform the way I want in both MSIE 5
and 6. After that is successful, I
Collin Davis wrote:
Since IE doesn't recognize :hover apart from anchor tags, I only use :hover on anchor tags.
As I have done as well. Though now I'm wondering why not just use an
onmouseover, hidden by either conditional comments or conditional
compilation, as well?
However, if NN4.x was
I think it is important *not to* buildtest in IE first.
You have to avoid building your code on top of some IE bug/quirk.
It is much less work to force IE to behave well,
than making all other browsers misbehave like IE.
For that matter I build and test pages for Firefox and Opera7 first
(having
Mordechai Peller wrote:
And there's your mistake. As has been discussed many times on this list
and elsewhere, it's much easier and faster to first code to standards
and then correct for IE.
I may be a duck out of water here, but I don't find it to be so. I've done
it both ways, and marking
You have to avoid building your code on top of some IE bug/quirk.
The only bug/quirk with IE that I've come across that needed my attention
was the big one: box model. I prefer to use the box in a box sort of
workaround, rather than tantek, SBMH, modified SBMH or alternate BMHs,
simply because I
The only bug/quirk with IE that I've come across that needed my attention
was the big one: box model. I prefer to use the box in a box sort of
workaround
This needs excessive divs and without IE support for '' selector requires
them additionally messed with lots of id/classes.
Why serve any
re: and even not all stylesheets are 'pure', take this one:
Name: Lim Yuan Qing
Age: 14
DOB: 25th January 1990
Location: Singapore
Yuan Qing is an alumnus of Temasek Secondary and Ngee Ann Primary. Come
2005 he will attend school at Temasek Junior College in its Integrated
Programme (IP).
On
Title: RE: [WSG] Why style to IE?
Thanks for the Dean Edwards link!
ByteDreams
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Mordechai Peller
Sent: Monday, December 27, 2004 2:01 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Why
Title: RE: [WSG] Why style to IE?
One other thing... Have you not used this method yourself for any particular reason, other than the opportunity just didn't present itself? Just curious.
ByteDreams
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED
19 matches
Mail list logo
