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]
*******************************************************************

Reply via email to