you're still exaggerating (if not outright lying). if you're only applying that font to one thing on a page, you'll use a few extra bytes with CSS; in any real-world situation <font>s lose hands down.
for a full-height sidebar you've got display: table; (which only fails because of IE), faux columns and probably a number of other ways that don't come to mind
yeah, but backwards compatibility is an important part of XHTML 1
There are Many basic concepts of layout which I would love to see CSS do- but as of yet I have not seen.
Can you give an example of a layout you don't think CSS is capable of?
I really don't understand where you're coming from. What can IE do that CSS can't? How does lack of support for position: fixed, max-width or:hover make it easier for a designer to make his page look right?
The key word is "solely". Homicide is just as natural as eating meat, but it doesn't make it right.
And BTW, where did I make an ad hominem? The brainlessness comment wasn't aimed at you, I was trying to point out that the reason people are vegetarians is because animals aren't brainless. The amount of brainlessness required before it's OK to kill something is the real issue here.
And just because I wouldn't want you to waste any more time with non-sequitors, I'm not a vegetarian or a hippie or a theist.
Nobody's saying that the user is substandard or doesn't deserve to use a piece of software.
It's not just about constructive criticism versus pointless whining. For example, saying that the GIMP needs an MDI is constructive criticism, and it's entirely possible that adding an MDI will increase the number of users. But it's quite apparent that nobody currently contributing to the GIMP (or capable of contributing to it) cares enough to add it. They're donating their time because they want to. Who are you or anybody else to tell them how they should spend that time?
Obviously if having a lot of users is a major goal of a project it would irrational to ignore user interface complaints. It would then follow that any project ignoring UI complaints isn't being aimed at the people who are complaining (unless the people in charge are lunatics).
If it's a problem, somebody will fork it. In the meantime nobody, not even the common consensus, is entitled to having their suggestions implemented.
The problem here is that the only people who don't like the Gimp's interface are unwilling or unable to fix it; the people actually working on it (and lots of people like myself who don't) have either no problem with it or *gasp* actually prefer it to the alternatives being suggested.
Whether it's a flagship product or not, I fail to see why people should work to change something they like into something they don't.
To draw out this analogy, Linux and MacOS are pollenation while Windows is human intercourse. There's no such thing as perfectly safe sexual reproduction (you're exchanging unsigned biological substances, after all), but some forms are definitely safer as implemented.
The fact is that Windows loves to open it's sloppy orifices for any program that will take it. Every tool has at least a hairline fracture somewhere, but that doesn't excuse the manufacturer whose hammers explode on first use (unless wrapped up carefully).
You'd get more kicks from knocking Grandma offline than defacing major websites? Odd. I also see no reason to believe that Microsoft is specifically targeted by "geek assholes" just for who they are.
Slashdot Mirror
The American public? Sometime around 1776 would be my guess.
There was no such thing as Canada in those days, knucklehead. We were all British.
Let's see here...
Can you give an example of a layout you don't think CSS is capable of?
I really don't understand where you're coming from. What can IE do that CSS can't? How does lack of support for position: fixed, max-width or :hover make it easier for a designer to make his page look right?
What "specific style of web page" do you think that CSS is tailored for?
The only thing I can say to the rest of your comment is that you're very wrong.
Can you elaborate on this?
Actually You Fucking Idiot makes more sense for YFI. You Fail It is what was intended.
Any vegetarian who has an ethical problem with eating vat-grown slabs of meat or the like is an idiot, I concur.
(PS. I hate it when I try to get into an argument and then discover they're a perfectly rational human being :()
The key word is "solely". Homicide is just as natural as eating meat, but it doesn't make it right.
And BTW, where did I make an ad hominem? The brainlessness comment wasn't aimed at you, I was trying to point out that the reason people are vegetarians is because animals aren't brainless. The amount of brainlessness required before it's OK to kill something is the real issue here.
And just because I wouldn't want you to waste any more time with non-sequitors, I'm not a vegetarian or a hippie or a theist.
The only reason CSS "completely fucking sucks" is because IE is horribly broken. What "contradictory ideals" are you talking about?
In short: you don't know WTF you are talking about.
Naturalistic fallacy, YFI.
Sure, but the degree to which animals are brainless is the whole question, isn't it?
ROFLOLZORS! It is so true!
goddamn. now that is comedy!
I don't understand how it's possible to love and fight for a few arbitrary lines on a map.
Nobody's saying that the user is substandard or doesn't deserve to use a piece of software.
It's not just about constructive criticism versus pointless whining. For example, saying that the GIMP needs an MDI is constructive criticism, and it's entirely possible that adding an MDI will increase the number of users. But it's quite apparent that nobody currently contributing to the GIMP (or capable of contributing to it) cares enough to add it. They're donating their time because they want to. Who are you or anybody else to tell them how they should spend that time?
Obviously if having a lot of users is a major goal of a project it would irrational to ignore user interface complaints. It would then follow that any project ignoring UI complaints isn't being aimed at the people who are complaining (unless the people in charge are lunatics).
If it's a problem, somebody will fork it. In the meantime nobody, not even the common consensus, is entitled to having their suggestions implemented.
The problem here is that the only people who don't like the Gimp's interface are unwilling or unable to fix it; the people actually working on it (and lots of people like myself who don't) have either no problem with it or *gasp* actually prefer it to the alternatives being suggested.
Whether it's a flagship product or not, I fail to see why people should work to change something they like into something they don't.
You Americans an the silly conclusions you leap to...
Sure, but there are varying levels of security.
To draw out this analogy, Linux and MacOS are pollenation while Windows is human intercourse. There's no such thing as perfectly safe sexual reproduction (you're exchanging unsigned biological substances, after all), but some forms are definitely safer as implemented.
The fact is that Windows loves to open it's sloppy orifices for any program that will take it. Every tool has at least a hairline fracture somewhere, but that doesn't excuse the manufacturer whose hammers explode on first use (unless wrapped up carefully).
You don't need a second hard drive to dual boot.
Poor analogy. There presumably isn't anybody who's responsible for the poor design of sex in the first place or who is capable of fixing it.
You'd get more kicks from knocking Grandma offline than defacing major websites? Odd. I also see no reason to believe that Microsoft is specifically targeted by "geek assholes" just for who they are.
It does have something to do with Slashdot's HTML. If it didn't abuse tables, it wouldn't even be an issue.
It would probably depend on whether your church said that homosexuality is a sin or that homosexuals are filthy animals unfit to walk the earth.
It isn't statements of hatred that get you charged, it's promotion of hatred. A subtle difference, and nothing to do with the way people feel.
Oh, Angelfire! The only source more credible than that is Geocities.