on reddit today...
| SitePoint Sponsor |
on reddit today...
That's beautiful Rudy, one the image, and two that you go on reddit.
Twitter-@Ryan_Reese09
http://www.ryanreese.us -Always looking for web design/development work
thanks
actually, i just skim the best of reddit on http://popurls.com/
Does anything work in Internet Explorer? lol
Sure, but define "work"Originally Posted by louie540
A lot of things "work" in IE, but is just buggy.
Twitter-@Ryan_Reese09
http://www.ryanreese.us -Always looking for web design/development work
It was a joke, but ok.
Needlessly KIND to HTML 5.
Thermite works very well for Internet Explorer...
Then it would really live up to the nickname Internet Exploder, wouldn't it?
I stick to chrome, Google account integration as well as a few other things that are cool. So no matter where I am I have all my stuff just there.
Thermite for Exploder.... sounds like fun xD
So trusting. It's kinda sweet.I stick to chrome, Google account integration as well as a few other things that are cool. So no matter where I am I have all my stuff just there.
Always have a local backup of everything important to you. Then make backups of that backup. And be cool when the US gov't tells Google to give them all your information. And be okay with the server holding your information being shut down by the FBI because someone else using a Google service on that server has something with supposed copyright infringement.
When I use Chrome it tells me, in the upper righthand corner, that I'm "missing out" on something because I'm not signed into Google Chrome. Lawlz if I ever log into a browser hooked up to a large corporation with known privacy issues.
if your web page doesn't work in IE, ur doing it wrong
Well, it depends on your motive.
The message in that graphic doesn't seem to bear too much questioning. I mean, what browser does support HTML5? (None that I know of.) So is the implication that CSS is also involved here? If so, then plenty of non-HTML5 sites don't work in IE.
But maybe I'm thinking too much. (I certainly have a lean and hungry look ...)
fair commentWell, it depends on your motive.
it was not in regard to html5 per se, more in response to post #4
my assumption is that most people will want to make sure that a substantial portion of their web site's visitors are not shafted by b0rken pages
so you make it work in IE, full stop
[semi-offtopic] my original post, with the picture, was actually added to an older thread, but a moderator split it off into this (new) thread... and i did not assign this thread's title... so i'm wondering if another kind moderator would please fix the spelling error, as it appears that i did it, and i'm pretty careful about spelling errors
Ah, I see. (And my comment was just being cheeky, anyway. What you say is quite right, of course.
Off Topic:
Done! (Well, fixed some punctuation, anyhow. I'm not very good at spelling, but I don't think I've missed anything there.)so I'm wondering if another kind moderator would please fix the spelling error
Thermite always does the trick. Otherwise, C4.
ralph, you are a gentleman, thanks
I was playing along, but ok
Twitter-@Ryan_Reese09
http://www.ryanreese.us -Always looking for web design/development work
Sorry it's hard to tell in an online forum.
You knowing that, and yet you still assumed there wasn't a possibility of it being a joke as well.
Twitter-@Ryan_Reese09
http://www.ryanreese.us -Always looking for web design/development work
Lol I don't know, some of you guys seem so serious. I also realized we are starting to take over this thread.You knowing that, and yet you still assumed there wasn't a possibility of it being a joke as well
That image made my day. IE humor, it's just never ending.
In a way, IE is doing us a favor by not supporting HTML5 until it's actually ready. The mad rush to implement something that isn't finished yet will come back to bite us all.
Assuming that steaming pile of dung will EVER be ready, or should even be adopted for use in the first place given the loosening of structural rules, pointless redundant new tags, pointless wrappers masquerading as semantics, further fracturing the already screwed up world of codecs in the name of letting each browser maker pimp their own favorite codec (instead of letting the user decide which one they want and which they don't), and general pissing on the ashes of all the progress STRICT has given us the past dozen years...
Again, I can't believe ANYONE is DUMB ENOUGH to WANT to use it!!! The handful of 'neat' things it actually offers (the really neat ones having NOTHING to do with markup!) doesn't make up for the trip in the wayback machine with Mr. Peabody on coding practices. Carefully crafted for the people who until recently vomit up HTML 3.2 and slapped a tranny on it, and today just slap 5 lip-service on it -- churning out code WORSE than Frontpage did a decade ago.
Net improvement zero.
Which of course is why they had to put CSS3, CANVAS and the new javascript under it's banner -- NONE of which have anything to do with MARKUP. Remove those, and the Emperor is naked.... and not the fun type of naked either.
But of course, it's "new and shiny" giving book writers excuse to squeeze out another puppy, let professional lecturers fill another hall, and sleazeball scam artists once again practice nube predation using it like another sick buzzword on the people too stupid to know what "web 2.0" REALLY meant.
But apart from that, HTML5 OK, right?
I don't necessarily mind the idea of a "living" standard, which gradually adds features to HTML. When they are fully supported—and if they don't suck—I might use them. A few little things like the extra form attributes and and maybe associating an image with a caption seem OK to me, but that's about all at the moment.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks