photo gallery css erratic
in [CSS]
|
From: dorayme on 9 Apr 2010 07:09 In article <v5utr55agrs584odnfkihug4gaq8334vqm(a)4ax.com>, Josiah Jenkins <josiah-jenkins(a)somewhere_else.invalid> wrote: > Just a thought. > > You 'professional' types have to take account of which browsers > are in common use and write your pages accordingly. Hence the > comments I've seen about not just having different browsers on > your machines but, for example, different versions of IE. > Then there's the 'workarounds' you folks use to get a page to > display correctly in IE . . . > > We 'amateurs' who hang around here in the hope of improving > our output are, on the other hand, more likely than the normal > user (whatever that is ?) to be using a more recent OS and a > browser other than IE. > > And, as we're generally writing either 'vanity' or 'hobby' pages > rather than earning a crust for our work, we can (literally) > afford to ignore the Win 9* and W2K users. > > I'll go and sit quietly at the back of the room again ! You are saying that your pleasure is making websites for you to see. OK. That is fine. There are all sorts of hobbies in this world and let no man or woman laugh at this. -- dorayme
From: Albert Ross on 9 Apr 2010 08:24 On Fri, 9 Apr 2010 02:40:03 +0000 (UTC), Adrienne Boswell <arbpen(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >Gazing into my crystal ball I observed "rf" <rf(a)z.invalid> writing in >news:_6Gtn.16962$pv.5562(a)news-server.bigpond.net.au: > >> >> "Josiah Jenkins" <josiah-jenkins(a)somewhere_else.invalid> wrote in >> message news:eq8er5h49gv2ka2ligdatj20o7mmm9i25m(a)4ax.com... >> >>> It displays correctly on my box ! >> >>> Vista with SP2 >>> IE ver : 8.06.001.18882 >> >> >> And how many people are still using versions 7 and 6? >> >> In the real world? >> >> > >Probably quite a few, since Win2000 cannot use anything higher than 6, >and there are, I am sure, a lot of boxes around that have not been >upgraded to a newer OS. Ah yes good point! There are still not a few holdouts using 2000 for its speed and stability. Including some corporates who were unimpressed by XP and even less impressed by Vista, although it's "no longer supported". The rumour mill suggests they may jump straight to Win 7. Some folks are still using Win98 but let's not talk about them . . .
From: Albert Ross on 9 Apr 2010 08:27 On Thu, 08 Apr 2010 23:02:15 -0400, Ed Mullen <ed(a)edmullen.net> wrote: >Adrienne Boswell wrote: >> Probably quite a few, since Win2000 cannot use anything higher than 6, >> and there are, I am sure, a lot of boxes around that have not been >> upgraded to a newer OS. >> > >Considering that, I wonder if this notion has any validity or can gain >any traction: > >If site designers abandon supporting IE6, IE7 and below, won't that >force OS and browser upgrades? I mean, at some point, won't people and >organizations so rooted in the past finally be forced "bite the bullet" >and get dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century? > >And the ones that don't? Do we really care? I suspect the main driver for upgrading will be hardware. Literally, as drivers for new hardware no longer support older OS's.
From: Albert Ross on 9 Apr 2010 08:31 On Fri, 09 Apr 2010 11:12:10 +0100, Josiah Jenkins <josiah-jenkins(a)somewhere_else.invalid> wrote: >Just a thought. > >You 'professional' types have to take account of which browsers >are in common use and write your pages accordingly. Hence the >comments I've seen about not just having different browsers on >your machines but, for example, different versions of IE. >Then there's the 'workarounds' you folks use to get a page to >display correctly in IE . . . Depends how you define "professional" Take a look at some of the "professional" sites and run the validator over them. Have a barf bag handy. I found a corker the other day among I think 220 html errors and 86 css errors "Unknown pseudo-element or pseudo-class :hoover " that tickled my fancy
From: Chris F.A. Johnson on 9 Apr 2010 12:14
On 2010-04-09, Albert Ross wrote: > On Fri, 09 Apr 2010 11:12:10 +0100, Josiah Jenkins ><josiah-jenkins(a)somewhere_else.invalid> wrote: > >>Just a thought. >> >>You 'professional' types have to take account of which browsers >>are in common use and write your pages accordingly. Hence the >>comments I've seen about not just having different browsers on >>your machines but, for example, different versions of IE. >>Then there's the 'workarounds' you folks use to get a page to >>display correctly in IE . . . > > Depends how you define "professional" > > Take a look at some of the "professional" sites and run the validator > over them. Have a barf bag handy. > > I found a corker the other day among I think 220 html errors and 86 > css errors > > "Unknown pseudo-element or pseudo-class :hoover " That sucks! > that tickled my fancy -- Chris F.A. Johnson <http://cfajohnson.com> =================================================================== Author: Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress) Pro Bash Programming: Scripting the GNU/Linux Shell (2009, Apress) |