Re: Solution - A Perfect Web Site!

At 10:30 PM 2/12/01 -0800, Sathish C. Bramhan wrote:
>
>To everyone:
>
>After three Days/Nights of trial and error, here is my Solution to the
>problem. Last night when I sent a request for a solution, I should have
>re-phrased the title as, "A Perfect graphic intensive html/xhtml page." I
>thought at least "One" person from HWG related forums could answer my
>problem. I have received several mails from you guys. Guess how many
>suggestions for a proper solution? - NONE! Most of the replies were utter
>nonsense.

Here is the Solution:

1) Stop using transitional DTD's.
2) Abandon slices/layers and CSS.

Do those two things. Your problem(s) will be solved.

Now, come back and tell me you can not build a graphic rich BEAUTIFUL page
using a ratified dtd.

You know, I'm hearing all this crap here "worrying" about NN6. Forget it.

Look, like it or not, the browser manufacturers look to the W3 for the
standards that will give their browser baseline functionality. I'm
reasonably sure NN got the same information MSIE and all the rest of them got.

NN blew it (apparently). It seems to me like it is VERY morally (and
commercially) wrong to hear all the little voices saying "oh God, I need to
change the way I code to accommodate those idiots at NN".

Bull S . . . .

You write the page to the RATIFIED standard. You put a link on the page to
the W3 validator. You explain to the owner of the site what that link
means. When NN6 viewers start dropping like flies and screaming at the
owner of the site, you can hold your head up and say: "Look. The browser is
broken, not my code. HERE, LET ME PROVE THAT TO YOU." And "Here is the
e-mail address for Netscape - go talk to them. I can PROVE there is no
error in my code causing the "problem".

I really don't see an issue here - unless you insist in encoding a bunch of
proprietary crap that is actually going to DETRACT from the effectiveness
of the message in the first place. You know, like with tons of JS enhanced
graphics, layers, slices. you know, all that stuff that adds not a WIT to
the functionality of the page or the customers ability to BUY the product
you are selling, but destroys your ability to prove you made no mistakes.

Fuzzy.
Wearing thin.
______________________________________________________________
Captain F.M. O'Lary
webmaster(at)canopy.net
Copywight 2001 Elmer Fudd. All wights wesewved.
------------------------------------------------------------------

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