Re: CSS in Netscape

-----Original Message-----
From: Ted Temer <temer(at)c-zone.net>
To: hwg-basics(at)hwg.org <hwg-basics(at)hwg.org>
Date: Wednesday, September 29, 1999 4:33 PM
Subject: Re: CSS in Netscape


>Paul and others --
>
>Don't mean to pick on Paul, he is only saying what others have
>said and I am only questioning the practicality, not the
>desirability.
>
>>If the W3 is so far behind, why can't the latest browsers comply
>to these
>>standards?
>

No offense taken.

>Then some modeler wails, "Why can't they stick to the standards?"
>Well -- It's pretty hard to use 3/32 balsa if there "ain't" any
>ribs.
>
>To a very real degree, we have the same thing going on all the
>time in the whole computer world, not just HTML. Many so called
>"standards" are obsolete even before they are "adopted". The
>competition in the Free Enterprise world is simply too fast paced
>and unrelenting to insure that every--even most--so called
>standards all get picked up and included in every application
>that gets produced.
>
>Do I think this is right or good?? -- Not really but it is a fact
>of life and somewhere along the line we have to quit worrying
>about "paper" standards and look at the real world in a PRACTICAL
>way.
>
>And that way is there for all to see ..

I aggree that foward movement is the way we should all be directed, and so
the same for innovation and development for new tools and techniques.  My
beef is that the "Big 2" seem to ignore the standards and decided to
implement the rendering dependant on their own "standards".  In the long
run, we as designers, have to make a decision - - Which "1" will we design
our site to comply.

In a way, this reminds me of the "Coke/Pepsi Wars" of the 70's.

The problem, as I see it, is that while these "2" are having at it, other
platforms with other browsers will see the activity and decide to implement
their own interpretations as well.

We have all seen the "Best Viewed With" buttons, and despite the arguments
of claiming this shows the author's inability or lack of desire to create a
universal page, it's almost becoming a neccessesity.

>
>Which browser supports what. It does not matter a whit who thinks
>who, did right or wrong or whether We Willie Gates had a darn
>thing to do with it. It is the world we HAVE to live with, like
>it or not. And for that matter--Are there any among us that
>actually, really, thinks that if it ever came to a war between
>Netscape, W-3 or Microsoft -- well -- is there any doubt who
>would win??
>

No doubt about it!  The U.S. Government has adopted the standards as
recommended by W3C.  Some of their requirements go into effect August 1,
2000.  Don't get me wrong, Billy has been helping me fill my wallet for
years!  He may have the Billions, but quite a few legal professionals have
been gently gnawing away at some of it lately.

>The bottom line--AT THIS TIME--is that the current state of the
>browser art lies with Internet Explorer. "No brag--just fact", as
>a TV actor used to say.

I just looked at my server logs for the last 4 months, 122 different
browsers, mostly different flavors of IE.  Now consider trying to develop a
way to make sure a page was rendered for each of just the MS browsers.  BTW,
the IE flavors were from 2.0 to 5.0 on many different platforms.  Note, my
server is very "low impact".

>
>>I would like suggest we, as a group, start "hammering" the
>browser
>>developers with e-mail stressing our dissatisfaction in
>rendering our work
>>when created (or coded) to the W3 specifications.
>
>Good luck. But in the meantime those of us trying to make things
>work MUST live in that real world THAT EXISTS right now.
>Therefore, as I have said in the past, the only PRACTICAL
>validation is what actually works in the 4x browsers with some
>web authors still forced to be sure their work will degrade at
>least to an acceptable degree in 3x browsers. (Depending on their
>client base.)
>
>When someone on this list asks a question, filling them with make
>believe "standards" that may NEVER come to pass doesn't really
>help them all that much. When they are up to their a - - in
>alligators, it does little good to mention the "standards" say
>the swamp is supposed to be drained.

But then, shouldn't the experienced web developers of this list point them
to the standards of correct code, as sanctioned by the HWG (who supply the
platform for this list)?  If we all spend our efforts on going with the
flow, trying to decide which browser does what, and do nothing else to
express our dissatisfaction, are we really helping the people that ask
questions?  The "make-believe" is believing that "we" will always control
the web.  The fact is that the U.S. is not the first in requiring (by law)
that certain organizations' web pages be built to spec.

>
>Don't get me wrong. I wish I did have the time to "hammer" on
>Browser developers and take lance to an occasional windmill. It
>might be kind of fun.

Again, the best part of the Internet is also the worst, No Limits!......
Yet!

There is already  legislation requiring Government Web Sites be in
compliance to standards recommended by W3C by August 1, 2000.  Do we really
think these standards are aimed at any one browser?  Do we really think our
government will stop there?  Shouldn't we be ready to change our design
practices?  Just because a Corvette can do the 1/4 mile in under 14 seconds
doesn't mean we have to show this fact at every green light.  (although it
could be fun!)  And since I just happened to bring the auto industry (here I
go, showing my age) look at how the technology in engines has developed in
the past years.  Today, a fuel injected (meeting emission standards) car
accelerates faster than a similar model of years ago -- with better overall
fuel economy.  More horsepower/pound with a smaller engine.

When we're up to our a - - in alligators, should we swim a little faster,
beat them to the bite, or learn to swim with them?

If I interpret the W3 guidelines correctly, we should build content first
and "flash" second.  This doesn't mean building to the obsolete browsers,
rather making sure our pages will be viewable to all browsers.  Take a look
at the HWG Home Page with a current 4.x browser, then have a look at it with
IE3.0.  Maybe the fancy style-sheet button treatment won't look as good, but
it's navigable and the content isn't destroyed.

We as web developers are really the ones getting "beat-up".  I'm just trying
to evaluate just how far this is going to go, and if the browser developers
listen the "source-code ignorant" (the general web visitor) we (the web
developers) will always be fighting with rendering techniques.

paul

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