<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Lists of things to know</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2005/06/23/lists-of-things-to-know/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2005/06/23/lists-of-things-to-know/</link>
	<description>News, opinion, and fresh thinking for web developers and designers. The official podcast of sitepoint.com.</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 02 Dec 2008 07:48:28 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Andy</title>
		<link>http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2005/06/23/lists-of-things-to-know/#comment-4126</link>
		<dc:creator>Andy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">940930493#comment-4126</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Use of 'onEvent' handlers in the page, rather than registering a listener.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Tables everywhere - but equally, doing it through CSS is so hard compared.&lt;/p&gt;

</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Use of &#8216;onEvent&#8217; handlers in the page, rather than registering a listener.</p>
<p>Tables everywhere - but equally, doing it through CSS is so hard compared.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BerislavLopac</title>
		<link>http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2005/06/23/lists-of-things-to-know/#comment-4127</link>
		<dc:creator>BerislavLopac</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">940930493#comment-4127</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;One of the most common bad practices, especially when it comes to Web applications, is trying to make a Web application look and behave like desktop app, especially when it's done with horrible JS solutions.&lt;/p&gt;

</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One of the most common bad practices, especially when it comes to Web applications, is trying to make a Web application look and behave like desktop app, especially when it&#8217;s done with horrible JS solutions.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CorporateSlacker</title>
		<link>http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2005/06/23/lists-of-things-to-know/#comment-4128</link>
		<dc:creator>CorporateSlacker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">940930493#comment-4128</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;My current employer has been known to pass out screenshots of MS Access and say "build this." In HTML and javascript....there is some fugly code running around this office....&lt;/p&gt;

</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My current employer has been known to pass out screenshots of MS Access and say &#8220;build this.&#8221; In HTML and javascript&#8230;.there is some fugly code running around this office&#8230;.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sil</title>
		<link>http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2005/06/23/lists-of-things-to-know/#comment-4129</link>
		<dc:creator>sil</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">940930493#comment-4129</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;BerislavLopec: that's interesting. I wouldn't necessarily call that an example of bad practice; trying to make a web app look like a desktop app isn't inherently a bad thing. People understand how to use desktop apps; if there is such a thing as a UI standard, that's where it's to be found. There are no human interface guidelines for the web, and only a set of de facto rules which are violated so regularly that they aren't rules at all. Perhaps you could explain in more detail why looking like a desktop app is so bad?&lt;/p&gt;

</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>BerislavLopec: that&#8217;s interesting. I wouldn&#8217;t necessarily call that an example of bad practice; trying to make a web app look like a desktop app isn&#8217;t inherently a bad thing. People understand how to use desktop apps; if there is such a thing as a UI standard, that&#8217;s where it&#8217;s to be found. There are no human interface guidelines for the web, and only a set of de facto rules which are violated so regularly that they aren&#8217;t rules at all. Perhaps you could explain in more detail why looking like a desktop app is so bad?</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: messclf</title>
		<link>http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2005/06/23/lists-of-things-to-know/#comment-4130</link>
		<dc:creator>messclf</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">940930493#comment-4130</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;nice&lt;/p&gt;

</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>nice</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: maetl</title>
		<link>http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2005/06/23/lists-of-things-to-know/#comment-4131</link>
		<dc:creator>maetl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">940930493#comment-4131</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;bad practice... mmm... long procedural looping, conditionals, discrete elements of logic not abstracted as functions... treating js like c, just because the syntax is similar... I learned this the hard way :( hopefully new people starting out these days will have a much better perspective to begin with.&lt;/p&gt;

</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>bad practice&#8230; mmm&#8230; long procedural looping, conditionals, discrete elements of logic not abstracted as functions&#8230; treating js like c, just because the syntax is similar&#8230; I learned this the hard way :( hopefully new people starting out these days will have a much better perspective to begin with.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CorporateSlacker</title>
		<link>http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2005/06/23/lists-of-things-to-know/#comment-4132</link>
		<dc:creator>CorporateSlacker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">940930493#comment-4132</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;maetl - given the low level of proficiency my IT professors exhibited with JavaScript ("just learn to adapt other people's code...hardly anyone actually writes JavaScript from scratch"), I doubt it.&lt;/p&gt;

</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>maetl - given the low level of proficiency my IT professors exhibited with JavaScript (&#8221;just learn to adapt other people&#8217;s code&#8230;hardly anyone actually writes JavaScript from scratch&#8221;), I doubt it.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: codepoet</title>
		<link>http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2005/06/23/lists-of-things-to-know/#comment-4133</link>
		<dc:creator>codepoet</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">940930493#comment-4133</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Personally, I think the danger of making a web app look like a desktop app is that you don't have the same controlled environment and you have to deliver the app through a third party product - namely the browser. This is especially obvious when it comes to keyboard testing. Accesskeys fail because the  operating system and the browser already use a lot of shortcuts themselves. &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;One example that always bugs the hell out of me are Eric Meyer's slides, as used by almost everyone at @media.&lt;br /&gt;
http://adactio.com/atmedia2005/&lt;br /&gt;
Dunno about MSIE, but in Firefox typing something in the address bar to go away and hitting enter shows the next slide instead :-)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;

</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Personally, I think the danger of making a web app look like a desktop app is that you don&#8217;t have the same controlled environment and you have to deliver the app through a third party product - namely the browser. This is especially obvious when it comes to keyboard testing. Accesskeys fail because the  operating system and the browser already use a lot of shortcuts themselves. </p>
<p>One example that always bugs the hell out of me are Eric Meyer&#8217;s slides, as used by almost everyone at @media.<br />
<a href="http://adactio.com/atmedia2005/" rel="nofollow">http://adactio.com/atmedia2005/</a><br />
Dunno about MSIE, but in Firefox typing something in the address bar to go away and hitting enter shows the next slide instead :-)</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adrian</title>
		<link>http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2005/06/23/lists-of-things-to-know/#comment-4134</link>
		<dc:creator>Adrian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">940930493#comment-4134</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;IE only scripting. The countless sites (particularly banks!) that prevent a form from being submitted when a piece of javascript fails.&lt;/p&gt;

</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>IE only scripting. The countless sites (particularly banks!) that prevent a form from being submitted when a piece of javascript fails.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: someonewhois</title>
		<link>http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2005/06/23/lists-of-things-to-know/#comment-4135</link>
		<dc:creator>someonewhois</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">940930493#comment-4135</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Adrian -- "IE Scripting" is the same as requiring JS. It shouldn't be, especially for something like banking. JS should be an addon, not the only thing.&lt;/p&gt;

</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Adrian &#8212; &#8220;IE Scripting&#8221; is the same as requiring JS. It shouldn&#8217;t be, especially for something like banking. JS should be an addon, not the only thing.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
