Re: JavaScript in table tags<huh?>

oops- sorry all -

I knew i didn;t think my IE-all attitude would win me friends - but i hoped
it came over as a "flippant" comment;
intended :-(

I'm looking at it from a new-developer attitude - *wanting* to be compliant
but having enough problems with the basics of HTML, let alone all the
differences.
I've had people tell me to "get things going on IE and be competant
designing for IE before i even look at other browsers", which has a certain
logic - less things to worry about whilst learning a new area of skill and
one-step-at-a-time;
but I was afraid of then getting into bad habits and reliant on
IE-facilities;
but then i end up with a "too-much-too-soon" overload of new techniques;

I can't work out the best way to tackle fast-track learning;
so I'm going with the-3-main-browsers,  W3C / CSS and -
yelping a bit at all the problems that this is causing me.
As it would be so much *easier* to go for one-browser-only; but i'm at least
I'm not doing that.

I've read a few web-design books,  cover-to-cover, and i understand the
frustration of users when NS4 dropped some of their good facilities from
NS6; but (as i understood it) all in the interests of eventual
browser-compliance, so its good in the long run (i hope!) however annoying
for those reliant on NS4.

But, as a newbie, the idea of learning already-obsolete technologies to
support users on older browsers, when the direction is browser-compatibility
with the current standards -
just doesn't come too high up on my list of priorities.
There is so much to learn to get to be a compentant designer, that i want to
be fluent in the new stuff before considering the backward compatibility
issue.
(And the longer i leave it, the less of an issue it will be. )

Having said that -
last week I e-mailed  a Netscape customer site and asked them for an NS4 CD
for backlevel testing; i haven;t heard back from them, but if they provide
me with a CD (or I can get one anywhere else) then i will use it to at least
ensure that my sites are legible, if not slick, in that browser.
I've got machines with Win95 and Win98 in the house, and will use those too;
but I'll not spend much effort making things look good, just as long as they
show.

Currently, I'm unemployed;  spending all day every day trying to get myself
web-design skills; and many thanks to people on this list.
IF i manage to get myself a job, then i'll go with company policy;
IF i end up doing small jobs for local businesses (which is my current
target), then i'll "assume" that my target audience are home/domestic users,
who probably upgrade their home computers every couple-of-years.
I've seen a number of (totally different) sets of user-stats for the
different operating systems; I'd be quite open about the numbers to any
potential client - and tell him I'll "upgrade to look nice for the 2%
missing out - but that will double the cost"

(I wish, i can't even code a table yet; Bert spent not long re-writing the
result of   2 weeks' work; he took an amateurish tacky attempt and produced
a really slick smart pro design.
I'm about to give it all up anyway :-(


JAY:
>>-- or perhaps it just does
>>not affect your audience.
My only audience as i learn is help forums like yourselves; with all the new
stuff!
I guess I didn't mean that back-level is not important; but it is not *as
important* to me, as gaining competancy in the new technologies that are
heading toward compatibility;
as there is so much out there to learn, i have to prioritise.

>>#1: We have to face the reality that for the moment (hopefully soon to
>>change) this is an IE-centric world.  No matter what we think if MS or
>>their behavior or their products, a great percentage of our audience uses
IE.

I have spent years coding in MS environments, so MS (VB) is my background;
MS prodcuts have been my employment for the past decade (the bits I've been
employed in anyway).
I feel almost disloyal as I read what  mess MS are making of things; like
how they tried to copywrite Style sheets, years *after* W3C designed them
and released them as free-for-all!
They certainly are not very ethical in their actions;
*But* MS products have been my "bread and butter" for every time i've worked
over the past 10 years.
I'm getting weaned off them - but I've only known MS VB in the past few
years. (and i like the language) .


>>>I look forward to the day when people can freely update their browser
>>>without worrying about interaction with an operating system.

Indeed, on that at least we agree on! :-)
I just don;t have your knowledge and experience, so i have to prioritise my
direction, which i;ve chosen to be the newer technologies -  knowingly
losing some possible users on the way; but i'm still only learning.

I guess we "students" (though not unemployed by choice; doing web design in
the hope of chaging that) - have the luxery of choosing our own direction; i
can;t do all of it however much I'd like to!

>Larry write:
> The problem with this attitude is that not all of us consider IE to be
> an "upgrade" over Netscape,

I never meant to imply it was in any way an *upgrade*; i just acknoweledge
it is currently the most commonly-used browsers (and only cos Bill has the
most commonly used OS and sticks it on as default, it's not even "most
popular"  by user's choice, but by complancy and default) .

Sorry for any offence - it was a flippant and frustrated comment, at the
vast amount of stuff to learn; from a regimented, controlled (resticted) MS
environment - i'm overwhelmed by the different versions and browsers I have
to allow for.

Sorry all :-(

hilma
--x-----

HTML: hwg-basics mailing list archives, maintained by Webmasters @ IWA