Re: Table alignment problem

I agree on keeping the fancy stuff server-side, Fuzzy...we use
Perl and PHP for that.

Even though I look at your 3.2 support arguments and they seem so
infinately sensible, I just can't force myself to consider
dropping font formatting through CSS in favor of returning to font
tags.  There's no bridge back...I looked for it and found a huge
mental block...:).  In our case, at least, I would have to say
that any browse that does not support CSS for such simple things
as font formatting will take delivery using it's own defaults.  No
biggie...still usable content.

Other than that, I agree with most of it, and it's a solid
argument for beginners especially to look at.  We, too, do our
business without advertising.  The only 'secret' is in the quality
of service that causes the past customer to recommend us to the
next one.  This is the Internet at it's best...word of mouth
advertising...and is (IMHO) the highest goal of any successful
business: thrive based on customer opinion.

D


----- Original Message -----
From: "Captain F.M. O'Lary" <ctfuzzy(at)canopy.net>
To: "Ken Lanxner" <klanxner(at)home.com>; "Captain F.M. O'Lary"
<ctfuzzy(at)canopy.net>

Indeed I do believe that intoto 3.2 is the most widely supported
dtd at
this time. Granted, I seiously doubt you will get a lot of <4.X
browsers on
your (by design) multi-media sites, you are far more likely to see
those
browsers hitting public information and academic information
sites.

~But~

I for one am seeing more "third world" visitors hitting my sites,
I'm have
to believe that in many parts fo the world they are just
*beginning* the
(approximately) same type of "digital revolution" we have seen in
the more
"modernized and civilized" countries over the last few years.

My line of thinking runs that if I can design feature rich sites
that WILL
accomodate "everyone" I should.

Now, please, for the record remember, I DO NOT leave out all the
"cool
stuff" the 4.x dtd's allow, I use 3.2 and script the "advanced
functions"
using SSI (usually PERL). SO I'm NOT saying build bland borring
pages.

I'm saying _ combine _ the older more stable technologies to
achieve the
same net result as the 4.X dtd's while maintaining the ability to
serve
that cool stuff tot he widest possible audience.

As a *very* brief example; it was recently asked; Well Fuzzy, how
do you
process forms with no JavaScript?

Answer, you do it the way that works in ALL browsers, you do it
server side
with PERL (or the like).

See? Different approach, more universal solution - same result.

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