SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

View Poll Results: Do you mind coding with hacks and turnarounds for NS4?

Voters
81. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes it makes me feel smart

    7 8.64%
  • No it makes me waste a lot of my time

    74 91.36%
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 82
  1. #26
    <C: web standards /> cybercodeur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Montral
    Posts
    729
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    And opera keeps on climbing my ladder of appreciation
    Denis Boudreau <C/> - Web Standards & Accessibility
    [+] ICQ number: 115649885 || Email: denis@cybercodeur.net
    [+] Daily Weblog on Web standards and accessibility : CYBERcodeur.net

  2. #27
    SitePoint Evangelist =X='s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Posts
    487
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    have you already tried the mouse gestures?
    I'm so used to them I sometimes accidently use them in explorere and other programs too
    PHP-Webservices - Profesional Hosting and Programming of sites.

  3. #28
    Wanna-be Apple nut silver trophy M. Johansson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Halmstad, Sweden
    Posts
    7,400
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by =X=
    IE shows everything bigger then opera etc
    Unless you use the power of fixed pixel sizes!

    Code:
    font-size: 12px;
    Mattias Johansson
    Short, Swedish, Web Developer

    Buttons and Dog Tags with your custom design:
    FatStatement.com

  4. #29
    <C: web standards /> cybercodeur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Montral
    Posts
    729
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by =X=
    have you already tried the mouse gestures?
    What mouse gestures?
    Denis Boudreau <C/> - Web Standards & Accessibility
    [+] ICQ number: 115649885 || Email: denis@cybercodeur.net
    [+] Daily Weblog on Web standards and accessibility : CYBERcodeur.net

  5. #30
    SitePoint Evangelist =X='s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Posts
    487
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    hold down your right mouse button and move your mouse to the left. release the right mouse button

    now you should get a message asking if you want to continue using the mouse gestures, and a link to some explanation about them
    PHP-Webservices - Profesional Hosting and Programming of sites.

  6. #31
    Back in Action Winged Spider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    outside my mind
    Posts
    900
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Reasons not to drop non-standard browsers:

    5%-30% of your traffic is going to come from Netscape 4.7.

    You design for standards:

    If you have 10,000 unique hits a day
    And you miss 10% (because of Netscape) of them that's 1000 hits
    1000 x 365(days of the year) = 365,000 hits lost per year.

    Let's say that you have a 5% conversion rate on a product or service that gives you a $5 profit.

    So out of those 365,000 hits, 18,250 WOULD have bought your service/product.

    $18,250 x $5 = $91,250 that you just missed out on.

    These numbers are a little big, but hopefully you got my point. Coding for Netscape 4.7 IS worth it. If somebody gave you $10 in singles would you give one back if it wasn't standards complient?

    It's easy to say "screw non-standards browsers", but it's difficult to take the time to make sure that your site is accessable by all users, and not just the select FEW that upgrade their browsers often. I was a standards nazi for a while but my youthful need to rebel was replaced by a wiser look at the web.

    If you are designing a standards complient site than you shouldn't be using tables. All CSS for layout. Making your pages viewable in a desent format for non-standards browsers is easier than brushing your teeth.

    and spend more time on important issues such as useability and accessibility.
    Shouldn't this be what were spending most of our time on anyway? If a sites not 100% usable or accessable then why even put it online?

    Analogy:
    Websites are like music albums.
    I have a CD player.
    Record labels often only release on CD and Cassette.
    I'm not going to complain to them because their CDs don't work in my 8-track player.
    But you would complain if the CD wouldn't play in your non-standards player?

    Why would you buy a CD if you didn't have a CD player?

    In our case users already have the CD player, it's just not the newest and greatest one.

    What are we fighting for here, the greater good of the web, or burden of the developer?


  7. #32
    SitePoint Evangelist =X='s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Posts
    487
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    All CSS for layout
    now how many browsers support that correctly...??
    PHP-Webservices - Profesional Hosting and Programming of sites.

  8. #33
    Back in Action Winged Spider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    outside my mind
    Posts
    900
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Supporting it correctly? none

    Netscape 4.7 (the main non-standards browser) does support enough CSS so you could turn your Table-Less layout into a very usable webpage.


  9. #34
    SitePoint Evangelist =X='s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Posts
    487
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    could you show me an example of such a site?
    PHP-Webservices - Profesional Hosting and Programming of sites.

  10. #35
    <C: web standards /> cybercodeur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Montral
    Posts
    729
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Winged Spider, I get your point, but in my opinion, I've taking exactly the opposite route as yours. To start I wouldn't do with standards because my job was to make everything accessible. Now as I see it, I turned my opinion all the way round.

    I know exactly what you mean with your profit example. I've explained it so often to people I work with that I almost feel I'm the one who developped the concept in the first place.

    However, it is impossible to follow both non-compliant browsers and compliant ones with the use of CSS for instance. You simply cannot drive a BWW and a LADA at the same time. You either have to sit in one or the other and even if your butt is large enough to fit on both simultaneously, you still won't be able to drive them.

    Coding for everything is a myth. At some point you WILL have to hack around and work around code snippets to satisfy NS4. As much as I hate to admit it, this is the truth.

    IE and NS both have very decent support of standards. Decent enough to trust my work will display equally well in both of them if I do it right. Opera I'm not too familiar with so I won't say. But if it is as good as others say, it should as well.

    NS4? I don't think so.

    Accessibility issues are crucial. But accessibility in my book refers to people with disabilities (physical or technical). Those who simply won't follow the evolution will be left behind. I will try to accomodate you if you're blind or if your mouse just broke. But not if you're not ready to download a DOM browser.

    Again, there are exceptions to this. Some companies just can't afford to lose a single sale. Making money is why they're on the Web in the first place. But of all the sites that recquire 100% compliance with users, how many actually sell something? Most of them just want exposure. Being presented as Web standard compliant can be as good an exposure as being seen by anyone with a much lesser quality product.


    When I design for myself I decide to take the agressive approach. Browser redirection. Bang. Upgrade or be gone. I don't sell anything but my skills. This is clearly indicated in my sales pitch. I live with it just fine.

    My customers aren't as extremist in their views. They have to follow certain ruels of politically correctedness. There are many ways to invite a user to upgrade, some being more polite than others.

    And I find out the more I talk to them about it, the more they jump in with me. It's all a matter of trust and vision. It's not about where they are now. It's about where they plan on being tomorrow.
    Last edited by cybercodeur; Feb 14, 2002 at 11:19.
    Denis Boudreau <C/> - Web Standards & Accessibility
    [+] ICQ number: 115649885 || Email: denis@cybercodeur.net
    [+] Daily Weblog on Web standards and accessibility : CYBERcodeur.net

  11. #36
    <C: web standards /> cybercodeur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Montral
    Posts
    729
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by Winged Spider
    Supporting it correctly? none

    Netscape 4.7 (the main non-standards browser) does support enough CSS so you could turn your Table-Less layout into a very usable webpage.
    Even sites such as webstandards.com use tables to display in NS4.

    But hey! I love you all the same man! Different opinions are what makes this place so great.
    Denis Boudreau <C/> - Web Standards & Accessibility
    [+] ICQ number: 115649885 || Email: denis@cybercodeur.net
    [+] Daily Weblog on Web standards and accessibility : CYBERcodeur.net

  12. #37
    mouse monkey
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    656
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hi,

    I try and stick as far towards standards as possible, espially in personal projects. I havn't gone as far as doing all CSS layouts yet (cos im so used to tables, and fail misserably when trying to do more complicated layouts totally in CSS).

    However I want as many people to be able to visit my sites as possible. If I told a client that I would make their site totally standards complient but up to 30% of the people who try and visit it wont be able to. I think they'd go and give the job to someone else.

    I do seem to be spending more and more time making fixes for the different browsers so would love to see more support for web standards but untill users upgrade I can't see it happening. It sorta a catch22 situation, many users wont upgrade till they are forced to (not being able to view sites) and most sites wont be more standards supportive untill users upgrade.

  13. #38
    Back in Action Winged Spider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    outside my mind
    Posts
    900
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    However, it is impossible to follow both non-compliant browsers and compliant ones with the use of CSS for instance.
    To reply to the last post and this one now go to http://www.enworld.org/fancc/

    CSS design entirely, looks good in Netscape 4.7 and IE 6.1, and does pretty well on Bobby Cast, I could probably have level 3 accessability with no problem, and maybe ever 508.

    Coding for everything is a myth. At some point you WILL have to hack around and work around code snippets to satisfy NS4. As much as I hate to admit it, this is the truth.

    IE and NS both have very decent support of standards. Decent enough to trust my work will display equally well in both of them if I do it right. Opera I'm not too familiar with so I won't say. But if it is as good as others say, it should as well.

    NS4? I don't think so.
    See above comment, and I'm not the only one that runs a site like this. And I don't use any hacks to get the code to work. I do have a little problem in Opera.

    Accessibility issues are crucial. But accessibility in my book refers to people with disabilities (physical or technical). Those who simply won't follow the evolution will be left behind. I will try to accomodate you if you're blind or if your mouse just broke. But not if you're not ready to download a DOM browser.

    When I design for myself I decide to take the agressive approach. Browser redirection. Bang. Upgrade or be gone. I don't sell anything but my skills. This is clearly indicated in my sales pitch. I live with it just fine.
    Would your grandparents download a new browser or any older minded person you know? Are you saying that you'd rather not let them view your page? The Internet is scary enough for the non-young. Downloading a new browser is even scarier.
    You can't force things down people's throats. I bet a bunch of the users to your clients sites ended up in a loss of buisness because they didn't feel like your site was worthy of a upgrade. I know a really top notch local hosting guy that uses Netscape 4.7. If YOU don't take the time to make your site display right in that browser, he wants nothing to do with you.

    Being presented as Web standard compliant can be as good an exposure as being seen by anyone with a much lesser quality product.
    That's true, but I don't think that your going to be bringing in your target audience. It's people like me and you that would visit the site. Real customers know what they want, wasting keywords and content on "standards" would be a waste.

    And I find out the more I talk to them about it, the more they jump in with me. It's all a matter of trust and vision. It's not about where they are now. It's about where they plan on being tomorrow.
    CSS can do it now. CSS can do it later. There's little real reason why you would use tables now, when a design will soon be accomplished with exact pixel dimentions, And that same design will work all the way back to mosiac. Change the design? Just change the CSS.


  14. #39
    <C: web standards /> cybercodeur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Montral
    Posts
    729
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    It is indeed a nice site, plus it's a gaming site which makes it even more interesting

    However, you do hack around in a way to get it working. You use different CSS layouts to support NS4. I never said anything about that. This is something that can easily be done if you have a budget. Which is not always the case.

    My grandparents would problably ask me to come and download for them, like they called me to program their VCRs before they could do it themselves. Internet is not suppose to be the easiest thing around, but getting familiar with simple notions as downloading have to become a reflex.

    I make the decision of forcing it down people's throat because I can afford it. When I have time, I will offer an alternative if I find it is worth the hassle. By the time I decide, it might even be too late for the trouble of caring.
    Denis Boudreau <C/> - Web Standards & Accessibility
    [+] ICQ number: 115649885 || Email: denis@cybercodeur.net
    [+] Daily Weblog on Web standards and accessibility : CYBERcodeur.net

  15. #40
    <C: web standards /> cybercodeur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Montral
    Posts
    729
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    But you have to admit that your local top notch guy (as great or influencial as he may be) has to be a pain in the neck to keep on using netscape 4.7 primarily.

    To keep on using it, you HAVE to be one of those die-hard netscapers. Why keeping a program that does you no good and works correctly only half the time with poor support and inconsistent bugs?

    I started way back when NS 2 was THA thing. A lot of water has passed under the bridge since then and as much as I hate to admit it Microsoft has developped a much more performant product.

    (Now this is side tracking)
    Denis Boudreau <C/> - Web Standards & Accessibility
    [+] ICQ number: 115649885 || Email: denis@cybercodeur.net
    [+] Daily Weblog on Web standards and accessibility : CYBERcodeur.net

  16. #41
    SitePoint Evangelist =X='s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Posts
    487
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    to be honoust, I don't like that design - actually I've never seen a table-free site (that uses css to accomplish this, I'm not talking about sites like google) that I like...
    PHP-Webservices - Profesional Hosting and Programming of sites.

  17. #42
    purple monkey dishwasher scoates's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    794
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by Winged Spider
    Let's say that you have a 5% conversion rate on a product or service that gives you a $5 profit.
    Uh... 5% and $5 ? You're saying that you get 1 sale every 20 clicks? That's amazing. If this is true, I'd love to partner with you.

    But you would complain if the CD wouldn't play in your non-standards player?
    Absolutely! In fact, I'd probably take the CD _PLAYER_ back to the retailer and demand a refund. Plus, my non standard CD player wouldn't have the CD Digital Audio logo on it. Standards exist for a reason -- to protect consumers. Non-standard browsers should be treated as such. You don't see Panasonic bending over backwards to make their media work on Acme Corp's Triple-Discount "CD" player. You see Acme Corp bending over backwards to support the media.

    The web has changed very much in the past 2-4 years.

    S

  18. #43
    SitePoint Wizard bbolte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    The Central Plains
    Posts
    3,304
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    for those who want to know, here is a link to a table-less layout that works in NS4+, 3 column, none-the-less...

  19. #44
    Back in Action Winged Spider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    outside my mind
    Posts
    900
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    It is indeed a nice site, plus it's a gaming site which makes it even more interesting
    Thanks

    However, you do hack around in a way to get it working. You use different CSS layouts to support NS4. I never said anything about that. This is something that can easily be done if you have a budget. Which is not always the case.
    Maybe, the netscape pages just don't load the graphical CSS. There isn't really any code on the page that's not supposed to be there. You say it's a hack. :-) I say it is "strategic implementation of existing technologies and methods" :-)

    My grandparents would problably ask me to come and download for them, like they called me to program their VCRs before they could do it themselves. Internet is not suppose to be the easiest thing around, but getting familiar with simple notions as downloading have to become a reflex.
    We are coming from different sources here. The web is a scary place that has certain physcological factors associated with it. That's what I've read and believe. I would recommend the books "Future Shock" by Alvin Toffler, and "Understanding Media" by somebody I forgot, for reads this sort of subject.

    I make the decision of forcing it down people's throat because I can afford it. When I have time, I will offer an alternative if I find it is worth the hassle. By the time I decide, it might even be too late for the trouble of caring.
    Netscape 4.7 CSS - .5 hours
    Upload to Account - 2 minutes
    Test in Netscape 4.7 - .1 minute

    Cross browser compantibility with a CSS design - Priceless

    to be honoust, I don't like that design - actually I've never seen a table-free site (that uses css to accomplish this, I'm not talking about sites like google) that I like...
    Thanks for the opinion. BTW Sitepoint.com and Yahoo.com have been transformed into table less sites. Can't find the articles right now but I'm sure google will.

    Uh... 5% and $5 ? You're saying that you get 1 sale every 20 clicks? That's amazing. If this is true, I'd love to partner with you.
    That number isn't that far off. I've seen whole weeks of that conversion rate before. It pays to really define your keywords.

    Absolutely! In fact, I'd probably take the CD _PLAYER_ back to the retailer and demand a refund.
    I was talking about the CD and not the player. The web has changed much, but not enough to compare Panasonic with Netscape, Microsoft, and Opera. The music and entertainment industry demand standards. The web does not yet.

    But you have to admit that your local top notch guy (as great or influencial as he may be) has to be a pain in the neck to keep on using netscape 4.7 primarily.
    Not really. If my sites don't work in Netscape 4.7 then I'm not doing my job as a web designer.


  20. #45
    purple monkey dishwasher scoates's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    794
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I was talking about the CD and not the player
    That was my point. The broser is not the CD, but the CD Player.

    It's not the CD (Site) that's the problem in your scenario, but the Player (Browser). If you complained to the CD Manufacturer (Webmaster), they'd tell you to Get a Standard Player (Upgrade Your Browser).

    S

  21. #46
    SitePoint Evangelist =X='s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Posts
    487
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    BTW Sitepoint.com and Yahoo.com have been transformed into table less sites
    huh? since when is sitepoint tableless??? I just took a look at the source and it uses a hell of a lot tables...
    PHP-Webservices - Profesional Hosting and Programming of sites.

  22. #47
    Gone Fishing Japhi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Vancouver
    Posts
    280
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    There was an "experiment" a while back where someone converted the Sitepoint layout into a table free layout. It turned out looking almost like a clone of the tables layout.

  23. #48
    SitePoint Evangelist =X='s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Posts
    487
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    ah like that - I thought he meant that the real sites were without tables
    sorry
    PHP-Webservices - Profesional Hosting and Programming of sites.

  24. #49
    mouse monkey
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    656
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hi,

    That remains one of my favourite articles on Sitepoint because at the time it was published I had been reading a lot into webstandards. Indeed the Sitepoint design was recreated using totally CSS but it was complicated to reproduce it as the site was originally designed from tables. There wasn't such a seperation between design and content that CSS is intended for because of the wide use of images.

    I think totally CSS designs and web standards are being confused. You can build a layout using tables and still be standards complient and a lot of the CSS designs have to use hacks to make it work in all the major browsers because of the lack of standards. The use of hacks just shows the lack of standards around at the moment.

    As I said in theory webstandards is a good idea but won't happen any time soon because of users. If it weren't for users the Internet would be perfect .

  25. #50
    <C: web standards /> cybercodeur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Montral
    Posts
    729
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by Fletch
    If it weren't for users the Internet would be perfect .
    Amen!
    Denis Boudreau <C/> - Web Standards & Accessibility
    [+] ICQ number: 115649885 || Email: denis@cybercodeur.net
    [+] Daily Weblog on Web standards and accessibility : CYBERcodeur.net


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •