And my biggest beed with Firefox on OS X is that it allows styling of form elements, which look like some Windows/KDE crap from the start anyway.
Form elements are supposed to be drawn by the OS. If you start to mess with them (apart from background/text color, and maybe font/font size at best), you may end with users not recognizing your form elements.
Ok, I understand what you meant. But I'll also guess that you meant "CSS is missing a layout element", not "HTML is missing a layout element". HTML is not about layout, it's about structured content.
For the whole layout mess, my guess is that a simple [div style="height=100%"] would be enough, making it possible to at least make easy-to-make grids of blocks-within-blocks without messing up everything else already in place (both specs and all the websites already in place). I'm also guessing that making divs with height 100% is also what most people try at first.;-)
That's because "data tables" and "tabular data" has to be displayed with the table HTML element. That's what it's for!
Tables are not supposed to be used for page layout, which is what most people are talking about. Tables aren't bad, but people are using them the wrong way most of the time.
Calendar, database, etc: table Page layout with columns, header, footer and stuff: CSS
(Please don't tell me the research is really about accessibility, which is the only compelling reason I have so far seen for moving to CSS if you have an existing table-based layout on your site that works acceptably. The rest is mostly hype IME, usually proposed by people with a vested interest.
1. If you code your website with CSS-based layout instead of table-based layout, your content-to-noise ratio greatly improves, your actual content has a much better chance of getting indexed.
2. If all your layout is located in an external CSS file, with minimum tagging in the actual (X)HTML file, you get a caching of the layout code and a minimum download time per page.
3. If you remove all CSS layout code and kept the content structured with HTML (as it should be, i.e. HTML is meant for content markup, not layout), then you won't even need a special "mobile" website version. Your real website will work on cellphones, etc. (non-WAP cellphones - WAP is a pile of crap anyway)
4. Without a layout based on graphics, you also allow dial-up users to use your website with images disabled, for much faster browsing.
5. Your website, being plain (X)HTML, will be accessible not only to old browsers such as Netscape 3, but also text-only browsers such as Lynx.
6. Accessibility. If coded properly, not only do you get all the advantages listed above, but your website will be accessible by pratically everyone.
If that's not enough advantages to switch to (X)HTML+CSS, I don't know what is.
One last tip would be to only use Javascript, Flash and Java if absolutely necessary. Don't rely on any of those for displaying content, nor for navigation.
Safari updates come in with the system updates, most people just install them everything that's listed. I'd bet that most (95%+) OS X users have an up-to-date version of Safari.
FireFox and Opera users had to download their browsers on their own, so they should also know how to update their browser by themselves.
Internet Explorer, on the other hand, doesn't seem to be a forced update, and even if it is, it's not for all Windows versions.
I don't know of any countries that use "." to separate thousands.
Most metric countries use a space for thousands separators, and that's only so the numbers are easier to read. After all, "," should be used to write coordinates and "." is reserved for decimals.
As a perfect example, the only way to write two 4-digit+ with decimals coordinates would be something like 12 345.67, 89 012.34
Try to use any other way to write those coordinates and you'll have multiple interpretations of the numbers. Not good.
To me, all this number confusing crap ("," for thousands and/or decimals) should be banned, just like non-ISO dates (all dates should be YYYY-MM-DD, all numbers, leading zeros included).
I prefer to call the problems "Flash" and "Animated GIFs". Disabling plug-ins takes care of the first. Disabling animated GIFs takes care of the second. Isn't Opera great?
Aren't the iSight and microphone supposed to be electronically wired to the LED? I.E. if the iSight and/or microphone are being accessed, the LED lights up?
I have no problem centering something vertically or making two columns of the same height with dynamic content using nothing but a combination of HTML and CSS.
Really? Only HTML and CSS? No table and no javascript messing around rewriting the document?
Then why don't you share your genius with us, oh great AC?
IE7 won't replace IE5 and IE6 for quite a few years to come. Today's support comes from yesterday. As the parent wrote, we should have proper CSS support from IE users at around 2018.
... and still no "height=100% of parent container" either. We're still forced to do either javascript and/or visual hacks to make two columns of the same height with dynamic content inside each column.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh yeah, forgot about that... I never have to deal with either companies, so that little bit of information slipped my mind months ago.
It's just weird to see it called "Adobe Flash", did Macromedia cease to exist completely?
And my biggest beed with Firefox on OS X is that it allows styling of form elements, which look like some Windows/KDE crap from the start anyway.
Form elements are supposed to be drawn by the OS. If you start to mess with them (apart from background/text color, and maybe font/font size at best), you may end with users not recognizing your form elements.
And this is the first time he hears about it.
Ok, I understand what you meant. But I'll also guess that you meant "CSS is missing a layout element", not "HTML is missing a layout element". HTML is not about layout, it's about structured content.
;-)
For the whole layout mess, my guess is that a simple [div style="height=100%"] would be enough, making it possible to at least make easy-to-make grids of blocks-within-blocks without messing up everything else already in place (both specs and all the websites already in place). I'm also guessing that making divs with height 100% is also what most people try at first.
That's because "data tables" and "tabular data" has to be displayed with the table HTML element. That's what it's for!
Tables are not supposed to be used for page layout, which is what most people are talking about. Tables aren't bad, but people are using them the wrong way most of the time.
Calendar, database, etc: table
Page layout with columns, header, footer and stuff: CSS
There has to be another difference:p hp (I get an horizontal scrollbar in Safari and your top-right logo and text get cut off a bit)u re2.php (no horizontal scrollbar, everything is fine) ... "enjoy"? :(
http://www.eclipticenterprises.com/bio_ridenoure.
http://www.eclipticenterprises.com/profile_rideno
2. If all your layout is located in an external CSS file, with minimum tagging in the actual (X)HTML file, you get a caching of the layout code and a minimum download time per page.
3. If you remove all CSS layout code and kept the content structured with HTML (as it should be, i.e. HTML is meant for content markup, not layout), then you won't even need a special "mobile" website version. Your real website will work on cellphones, etc. (non-WAP cellphones - WAP is a pile of crap anyway)
4. Without a layout based on graphics, you also allow dial-up users to use your website with images disabled, for much faster browsing.
5. Your website, being plain (X)HTML, will be accessible not only to old browsers such as Netscape 3, but also text-only browsers such as Lynx.
6. Accessibility. If coded properly, not only do you get all the advantages listed above, but your website will be accessible by pratically everyone.
If that's not enough advantages to switch to (X)HTML+CSS, I don't know what is.
One last tip would be to only use Javascript, Flash and Java if absolutely necessary. Don't rely on any of those for displaying content, nor for navigation.
Safari updates come in with the system updates, most people just install them everything that's listed. I'd bet that most (95%+) OS X users have an up-to-date version of Safari.
FireFox and Opera users had to download their browsers on their own, so they should also know how to update their browser by themselves.
Internet Explorer, on the other hand, doesn't seem to be a forced update, and even if it is, it's not for all Windows versions.
I don't know of any countries that use "." to separate thousands.
Most metric countries use a space for thousands separators, and that's only so the numbers are easier to read. After all, "," should be used to write coordinates and "." is reserved for decimals.
As a perfect example, the only way to write two 4-digit+ with decimals coordinates would be something like 12 345.67, 89 012.34
Try to use any other way to write those coordinates and you'll have multiple interpretations of the numbers. Not good.
To me, all this number confusing crap ("," for thousands and/or decimals) should be banned, just like non-ISO dates (all dates should be YYYY-MM-DD, all numbers, leading zeros included).
I would try it, but there's no LED on my PowerBook and no iSight nor microphone on my Mac mini.
I prefer to call the problems "Flash" and "Animated GIFs". Disabling plug-ins takes care of the first. Disabling animated GIFs takes care of the second. Isn't Opera great?
Aren't the iSight and microphone supposed to be electronically wired to the LED? I.E. if the iSight and/or microphone are being accessed, the LED lights up?
Isn't technology great? In the future, Red Green is going to rule the world!
power != speed
;-)
You could be towing a semi-trailer with your Ferrari.
Tables aren't made for page layout, just like a bold paragraph isn't a sub-header.
My comment was about IE still not supporting PNG completely, not your comments themselves.
Then why don't you share your genius with us, oh great AC?
Tables are supposed to be used for tabular data, not content layout.
IE7 won't replace IE5 and IE6 for quite a few years to come. Today's support comes from yesterday. As the parent wrote, we should have proper CSS support from IE users at around 2018.
... and still no "height=100% of parent container" either. We're still forced to do either javascript and/or visual hacks to make two columns of the same height with dynamic content inside each column.
Too bad PNG is still not supported correctly by IE (alpha channel).
It's also too bad that CSS support is still buggy in some browsers. However, IE is the one still lagging far behind the others.
Flashlights can also be waved around but most don't even include a strap at all.
Mod parent informative/insightful. Nintendo also has previous history with such straps with the Nintendo DS.