Stuart Sherwood wrote:
I'm wondering how .net compares as I haven't had the chance yet to
build a site with it?
Current versions of ASP.Net have controls that favour IE over other
browsers by using proprietary code (Eg. validation controls with
Javascript use document.all). I think Microsoft have said they'll have
XHTML compliance with .Net 2.0 but right now it's tag soup. The html is
chosen by these controls differently for categories of browser, so
<asp:panel> becomes a <div> for IE and a <table> for Firefox (you can
override this, but it's the default behaviour). And the typical IDE,
VS.Net, produces mediocre WYSIWYG HTML by default.
Which leaves you with,
- Using 3rd party controls which may be compliant. Eg, there are
Ecmascript validation controls but they're not so popular and there are
integration problems in VS.Net (not sure whose fault this is though).
- Avoid or minimise the use of poorly written controls and instead write
strings of html to the page, perhaps by using literal controls as stubs.
- Using another framework that doesn't use the standard ASP.Net
templating model.
So yeah, it's pretty bad.
--
.Matthew Cruickshank
http://holloway.co.nz/
******************************************************
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
******************************************************
