Does anyone pay attention to standards?

[Eric Jarvis]

Re: Does anyone pay attention to standards?

Whitecrest whitecrest@whit ecrestziopzap.c om wrote:[color=blue]
> In article <c6mbia$dk4$1@n gspool-d02.news.aol.co m>,
> karl@NOSPAMkarl core.com says...[color=green][color=darkred]
> > > Well then you are limiting what you can do arn't you? Some times
> > > presentation matters, but your little brain can't understand that.[/color]
> > Again, here you go continuing your false dilemma by implying that standards
> > compliance limits the presentation.[/color]
>
> It does. Css is used for presentation. All CSS is not rendered the
> same way on different browsers. So if you want to have your site look
> the same on different browsers, then you have to limit the CSS that you
> can use. (I think we agree on that point.)
>[/color]

yes and no...you see nobody sane would want the site to look the same on
different browsers...not only is it a pointless goal it is also nigh on
impossible
[color=blue]
> Now, if CSS offers (say) 100 presentation features (yes there are more
> but this if to keep the math easy for you), but I can not use 30 of them
> because of browser compliance, I loose the presentation features these
> offered? (I can't use them because they would display differently on
> different browsers.)
>
> So sticking to 100% compliant code, AND making it work on all browsers
> limits your presentation, because you can not use all the features
> available.
>[/color]

wrong

because you are insisting that "working" equates to "looks identical"
something I don't believe that you can justify...certa inly when I've asked
people who make that claim to justify it in the past the responses have
been incoherent rambling, abuse or no response at all

--
eric

https://www.ericjarvis.co.uk

"live fast, die only if strictly necessary"

[Eric Jarvis]

Re: Does anyone pay attention to standards?

Whitecrest whitecrest@whit ecrestziopzap.c om wrote:[color=blue]
> In article <MPG.1af8c276fb a3ecf598c995@ne ws.individual.n et>,
> web@ericjarvis. co.uk says...[color=green][color=darkred]
> > > Well then you are limiting what you can do arn't you? Some times
> > > presentation matters, but your little brain can't understand that.[/color]
> > nonsense...work ing to the medium is not limiting what you can do...it's
> > working to get the best out of the medium[/color]
>
> Well the basic premise we disagree on is if all web pages have to be
> coded so every swinging dick in the world can see and use the site.
> Some think that is true, others think you need to pay attention you the
> people that actually use your site and see what they want.
>
> You do realize that some people actually seek out flash sites, and multi
> media presentations and games, and movies on the web right? And at the
> same time, others seek out sites they can see on the phone browser. The
> two types of sites can live in perfect harmony you know.
>
> Following standards, and trying to make your site viewable to everyone
> in the world, makes the first type of site impossible to build.
>[/color]

no it doesn't...and I've used Flash, video clips, and sound (not games as
yet, though I don't rule it out)...there are good ways to use all of
them...all it takes is a basic understanding of the medium...someth ing you
don't seem yet to have gained
[color=blue]
> If you disagree, then show me any fortune 500 site the site that is
> standards compliant.
>[/color]

I don't see how that would prove a case...it seems to be on a par with the
rest of your "logic"

--
eric

https://www.ericjarvis.co.uk

we don't need to make things idiot-proof,
we need to make idiots thing-proof

[Brian]

Re: Does anyone pay attention to standards?

Whitecrest wrote:
[color=blue]
> Css is used for presentation. All CSS is not rendered the same way
> on different browsers.[/color]

True. In some situations, it is not rendered at all.
[color=blue]
> So if you want to have your site look the same on different browsers[/color]

Why on earth would you want that?
[color=blue]
> then you have to limit the CSS that you can use.[/color]

Only if you start with an absurd goal.
[color=blue]
> So sticking to 100% compliant code, AND making it work on all
> browsers[/color]

Oops! non-sequitur. Just because it looks different to different uas
does not mean it does not work.

--
Brian (remove "invalid" from my address to email me)

http://www.tsmchughs.com/

[Toby A Inkster]

Re: Does anyone pay attention to standards?

Whitecrest wrote:
[color=blue]
> In article <pan.2004.04.27 .17.42.20.14360 9@goddamn.co.uk >,
> UseTheAddressIn MySig@deadspam. com says...[color=green][color=darkred]
>> > Thanks for the other example. The Mozilla code needs the "embed" to
>> > properly handle Flash (activeX)[/color]
>> No you don't. <object> will load Flash just fine -- in IE 4+, Mozilla,
>> Netscape 6+ and Opera 5+ (maybe 4+?).[/color]
>
> Without work arounds? Nope.[/color]

<object data="myfile.sw f" height="100" width="140"></object>

--
Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
Contact Me - http://www.goddamn.co.uk/tobyink/?page=132

[Toby A Inkster]

Re: Does anyone pay attention to standards?

Whitecrest wrote:
[color=blue]
> In article <pan.2004.04.27 .17.40.55.97749 @goddamn.co.uk> ,
> UseTheAddressIn MySig@deadspam. com says...
>[color=green]
>> So you are suggesting that it's impossible to code a three column layout
>> that works in IE and validates?[/color]
>
> Not suggesting that at all. I am suggesting that if you stick to 100%
> standards compliance, and disregard what browsers do, then you run the
> risk of disaster.[/color]

Where did I suggest that you disregard what browsers do?

--
Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
Contact Me - http://www.goddamn.co.uk/tobyink/?page=132

[Whitecrest]

Re: Does anyone pay attention to standards?

In article <pan.2004.04.27 .20.18.25.67288 1@goddamn.co.uk >,
UseTheAddressIn MySig@deadspam. com says...[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
> >> So you are suggesting that it's impossible to code a three column layout
> >> that works in IE and validates?[/color]
> > Not suggesting that at all. I am suggesting that if you stick to 100%
> > standards compliance, and disregard what browsers do, then you run the
> > risk of disaster.[/color]
> Where did I suggest that you disregard what browsers do?[/color]

Not you specifically.

--
Whitecrest Entertainment

https://www.whitecrestent.com

[Whitecrest]

Re: Does anyone pay attention to standards?

In article <MPG.1af8d22de5 d5017698c996@ne ws.individual.n et>,
web@ericjarvis. co.uk says...[color=blue][color=green]
> > It does. Css is used for presentation. All CSS is not rendered the
> > same way on different browsers. So if you want to have your site look
> > the same on different browsers, then you have to limit the CSS that you
> > can use. (I think we agree on that point.)[/color]
> yes and no...you see nobody sane would want the site to look the same on
> different browsers...[/color]

Since we can not agree on something as basic as this, then we will have
to enter into the world of the endless torment every time this topic
comes up. I simply believe that you should let the users dictate what
is right on the web, you on the other hand want some commission to do
it.

Oh well, carry on.
--
Whitecrest Entertainment

https://www.whitecrestent.com

[Whitecrest]

Re: Does anyone pay attention to standards?

In article <MPG.1af8d3c22b 273ae098c997@ne ws.individual.n et>,
web@ericjarvis. co.uk says...[color=blue][color=green]
> > If you disagree, then show me any fortune 500 site the site that is
> > standards compliant.[/color]
> I don't see how that would prove a case...it seems to be on a par with the
> rest of your "logic"[/color]

Hey, the world you talk about is all fantasy. Fortune 500 companies are
reality. If standards were so important then they would be doing it. Or
are you so pompous that you think that all the web developers in a
fortune 500 company are too stupid to know about standards, and only the
honored few in this newsgroup know the way....

Also, I don't believe I ever said that you should never code to
standards, or that you should not attempt to be in compliance. All I
say is that it is not THAT important in the long run. And until all
browsers work right, or Microsoft looses it's overwhelming market share
of browsers users, standards not real high on the importance list.

--
Whitecrest Entertainment

https://www.whitecrestent.com

[Whitecrest]

Re: Does anyone pay attention to standards?

In article <108ths1pbo8m1a 6@corp.supernew s.com>, usenet3
@julietremblay. com.invalid says...[color=blue]
> Oops! non-sequitur. Just because it looks different to different uas
> does not mean it does not work.[/color]

Never said it would not work. I said it would not look right. And
sorry, presentation sometimes matters. Thats all we disagree on.

--
Whitecrest Entertainment

https://www.whitecrestent.com

[Brian]

Re: Does anyone pay attention to standards?

Whitecrest wrote:
[color=blue]
> usenet3@julietr emblay.com.invalid says...
>[color=green]
>> Oops! non-sequitur. Just because it looks different to different
>> uas does not mean it does not work.[/color]
>
> Never said it would not work.[/color]

You did. But curiously, you snipped that part of the message.
[color=blue][color=green]
>> So sticking to 100% compliant code, AND making it work on all
>> browsers[/color][/color]

That's the part that came just before I wrote "Oops!..."
[color=blue]
> I said it would not look right.[/color]

Just to be clear, here's a fuller quote, reinserted from an earlier
message in this thread to which I was replying:
[color=blue]
> So sticking to 100% compliant code, AND making it work on all
> browsers limits your presentation, because you can not use all the
> features available.[/color]

But the point is not that it won't work on all browsers. It can easily
work on all browsers, that is, if your definition of work is
straitforward: the content is available in some form in all reasonably
conforming user-agents.
[color=blue]
> And sorry, presentation sometimes matters.[/color]

Since I never suggested otherwise, there's no need to apologize.
[color=blue]
> Thats all we disagree on.[/color]

We disagree on what it means for a web page to work. You are under the
impression that "work" means it must look the same in all browsers. I
don't know why that is important to you. I doubt it is important to many
visitors, since very few of them will take the time to compare your site
in 2 or more browsers.

--
Brian (remove "invalid" from my address to email me)

http://www.tsmchughs.com/

[Whitecrest]

Re: Does anyone pay attention to standards?

In article <108tr15c6plml4 9@corp.supernew s.com>, usenet3
@julietremblay. com.invalid says...[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
> >> Oops! non-sequitur. Just because it looks different to different
> >> uas does not mean it does not work.[/color][/color][/color]

(ok, I am talking about the presentation not working, you suddenly bring
up the page not working. Two totally different things.)
[color=blue][color=green]
> > Never said it would not work.[/color][/color]

In your context of the term "work", I never said it would not "work"
[color=blue]
> You did. But curiously, you snipped that part of the message.[/color]

No, you changed the meaning to fit your argument thats all. you were
confused.
[color=blue][color=green]
> > Thats all we disagree on.[/color]
> We disagree on what it means for a web page to work....[/color]

Only sometimes. You seem to believe that a page must work (be
accessible, standard compliant, Presentation is meaningless, etc...) on
every browser that shows up, all the time. I think each site and it's
goals and target audience must be evaluated before you can decide what
is best for the site.

--
Whitecrest Entertainment

https://www.whitecrestent.com

[Jan Roland Eriksson]

Re: Does anyone pay attention to standards?

On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 15:48:57 -0400, Whitecrest
<whitecrest@whi tecrestziopzap. com> wrote:

[...]
[color=blue]
>It does. Css is used for presentation. All CSS is not rendered the
>same way on different browsers. So if you want to have your site look
>the same on different browsers, then you have to limit the CSS that you
>can use.[/color]

Sigh...

Why is this "look the same" skeleton still rattling in the closet?

"Look the same" is an expression with zero, zilch, nada, nothing of
value to it, unless you are suggesting that a vast majority of web
surfers are always using a minimum of two browsers to look at every web
site they find interesting.

The real criteria to look at is...

1) Is my site presented acceptably good in browser A?
Is it fully usable in browser A?

2) Is my site presented acceptably good in browser B?
Is it fully usable in browser B?

If you can answer yes to the questions in 1) and 2) (and the same
questions for browsers C, D, E etc.) you can go tell your shrink that
you have finally been able to pass over your "look the same paranoia"
and that you are ready to move on to the next level of web design where
you will use every damned fancy feature you can find that is designed to
provide for a decent fall back in browsers where it can't be fully
understood.

Learn to follow good recommendations for how things on Internet are
supposed to work together, design your pages accordingly and be done
with it.

"Look the same" is NOT a primary criteria in that process.

--
Rex

[Jan Roland Eriksson]

Re: Does anyone pay attention to standards?

On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 15:59:36 -0400, Whitecrest
<whitecrest@whi tecrestziopzap. com> wrote:
[color=blue]
>In article <MPG.1af8c276fb a3ecf598c995@ne ws.individual.n et>,
>web@ericjarvis .co.uk says...[color=green][color=darkred]
>> > Well then you are limiting what you can do arn't you? Some times
>> > presentation matters, but your little brain can't understand that.[/color]
>> nonsense...work ing to the medium is not limiting what you can do...it's
>> working to get the best out of the medium[/color]
>
>Well the basic premise we disagree on is if all web pages have to be
>coded so every swinging dick in the world can see and use the site.[/color]

Anything else involves a level of discrimination.

The www was not designed to discriminate, quite the contrary in fact.

--
Rex

[Brian]

Re: Does anyone pay attention to standards?

Whitecrest wrote:
[color=blue]
> I never said it would not "work"[/color]

<quote>
So sticking to 100% compliant code, AND making it work on all browsers
limits your presentation, because you can not use all the features
available.
</quote>

You keep cutting that part, which I've reinserted again.
[color=blue]
> Only sometimes. You seem to believe that a page must work (be
> accessible, standard compliant, Presentation is meaningless, etc...)[/color]

You also, for some reason, keep repeating the lie that I claim that
presentation is meaningless. You cannot present any message where I said
any such thing for the obviouls reason that no such message exists.

Anyone who is more honest need only look at other messages in the thread
and see for themselves. Further comment is unwarranted.

--
Brian (remove "invalid" from my address to email me)

http://www.tsmchughs.com/

[Whitecrest]

Re: Does anyone pay attention to standards?

In article <f1mt80hb7k0ds2 7rrr1ks0leo4ta7 27f4a@4ax.com>,
jrexon@newsguy. com says...[color=blue][color=green]
> >It does. Css is used for presentation. All CSS is not rendered the
> >same way on different browsers. So if you want to have your site look
> >the same on different browsers, then you have to limit the CSS that you
> >can use.[/color]
> Sigh...
> Why is this "look the same" skeleton still rattling in the closet?[/color]

Nope not at all, I more often than not use 100% standard compliant code
that validates, and have great presentations. But not all sites can or
want to do that.

Do you think standards mean diddley to:

http://www.thedayaftertomorrow.com/

(caution you need flash and javascript to enjoy it)

They did not care, the site does exactly what it was designed to do
exactly the way it was designed to do it, and it "works" on most
browsers IF you want it to.

They don't care about anything else, nor should the because the site
does exactly what it is supposed to.
[color=blue]
> "Look the same" is an expression with zero, zilch, nada, nothing of
> value to it, unless you are suggesting that a vast majority of web
> surfers are always using a minimum of two browsers to look at every web
> site they find interesting.[/color]

Explain that to the above site.
[color=blue]
> The real criteria to look at is...
> 1) Is my site presented acceptably good in browser A?
> Is it fully usable in browser A?
> 2) Is my site presented acceptably good in browser B?
> Is it fully usable in browser B?[/color]

For most sites that is true. But completely wrong for the above
example. The site is designed to look exactly the same on as many
browsers it can. Standards are irrelevant.
[color=blue]
> "Look the same" is NOT a primary criteria in that process.[/color]

We disagree sometimes.

--
Whitecrest Entertainment

https://www.whitecrestent.com