Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Web Standards -- do you use 'm?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    I'm a complete standards follower now whenever possible. My site itself is entirely XHTML 1.0 compliant and tableless (except where tables are necessary for data).
    "63,000 bugs in the code, 63,000 bugs, you get 1 whacked with a service pack, now there's 63,005 bugs in the code."
    "Before you critisize someone, walk a mile in their shoes. That way, when you critisize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes."
    Utopia Software - Current Software: Utopia News Pro (news management system)

    Comment


    • #32
      gonna use web standards when they are a standard.
      Radio and TV Player for vBulletin

      Comment


      • #33
        They *are* a standard.
        :)

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Dream
          gonna use web standards when they are a standard.
          uh you realize what you just said?

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by DirectPixel
            They *are* a standard.
            They're de facto standards only, they're actually "just" Recommendations

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Faruk
              They're de facto standards only, they're actually "just" Recommendations
              Yes, but when all the major browsers support them, and refer to them by the same names... it's pretty much a standard. (...which is pretty much the definition of de facto..... )
              :)

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by DirectPixel
                I do everything listed, although I sometimes disregard CSS bugs in Opera, since not a lot of people who visit my sites use them.
                It shouldn't matter that most of the people who visit your site do not use it, it should be done to prevent bugs and make sure everyone can see it correctly. There is no point in cohering to web standards if you chose to be blind to something as simple as cross-browser compatibility - your vb skin shows that you did not choose to view your design in Opera quite blatently.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Ionsurge
                  It shouldn't matter that most of the people who visit your site do not use it, it should be done to prevent bugs and make sure everyone can see it correctly. There is no point in cohering to web standards if you chose to be blind to something as simple as cross-browser compatibility - your vb skin shows that you did not choose to view your design in Opera quite blatently.
                  There's a cost/benefit analysis behind that decision. Opera is a pain to code for, because not only does it identify itself as Opera, it also identifies itself as IE. Any browser-detections, therefore, break. Sure, some CSS hacks overcome those, but like I said, I did a cost/benefit analysis which resulted in giving preference to Mozilla and IE over Opera. Blatently put, spending the hours coding and debugging for Opera (of which a very small minority of the web use) was not worth it monetarily.

                  It's still usable in Opera. Just doesn't look its best.


                  Such harsh criticism from a group that invited me to join their company of elite programmers and designers?

                  Originally posted by Ionsurge
                  There is no point in cohering to web standards if you chose to be blind to something as simple as cross-browser compatibility - your vb skin shows that you did not choose to view your design in Opera quite blatently.
                  The visual aspects of the skin is done thru simple tables and CSS styling. It's perfectly accessible via non-CSS browsers, Lynx, and other text-based browsers.
                  Last edited by DirectPixel; Mon 20 Jun '05, 1:16pm.
                  :)

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    I'd disagree there Alex. With attention to detail you can end up only using 2/3 hacks on your average website and have it work in most browsers The cost will always outweigh the benefits when visitors turn away from your site because it doesn't look right.
                    Dean Clatworthy - Web Developer/Designer

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Dean C
                      I'd disagree there Alex. With attention to detail you can end up only using 2/3 hacks on your average website and have it work in most browsers The cost will always outweigh the benefits when visitors turn away from your site because it doesn't look right.
                      I meant cost-benefit, as in should I spent extra hours working on that or extra hours on clientwork.
                      :)

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Ionsurge
                        It shouldn't matter that most of the people who visit your site do not use it, it should be done to prevent bugs and make sure everyone can see it correctly. There is no point in cohering to web standards if you chose to be blind to something as simple as cross-browser compatibility - your vb skin shows that you did not choose to view your design in Opera quite blatently.
                        Okay, I took another look at it using Opera. I was surprised. You made it sound like the entire site was broken when using Opera.

                        All that's wrong is that a single <div> is being covered up by its parents container (a <table>). This is purely an Opera rendering issue, since the <div> already has a float property and is set relative to the parent element.

                        Opera is not supposed to clip the <div> when it overflows the <table>. Additionally, even when I set the z-index property (with an !important, even), it still ignores it.

                        Because of the nature of vBulletin (breadcrumb information is only accessible via navbar template), I am forced to put the breadcrumb <div> after the content table has started already.


                        You want to try fixing this?
                        :)

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Everything has to be right for me.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            At this time, I really only care that it works in Internet Explorer and Firefox under Windows. I don't test in Opera nor do I test Linux or Mac specific browsers. While accessibility is a long term goal it isn't an immediate one that will make a return on my investment now. As time goes on, I am sure anything I build will become more standards accessible but since I simply use templates and downloadable software, the incentive isn't there for me to invest the time and money needed to make standards compliant and accessible sites.
                            Translations provided by Google.

                            Wayne Luke
                            The Rabid Badger - a vBulletin Cloud demonstration site.
                            vBulletin 5 API

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by DirectPixel
                              Such harsh criticism from a group that invited me to join their company of elite programmers and designers?
                              I apologise if it seemed harsh, but it to me seems pointless in disregarding a browser. We did invite you to join due to the graphical skills you posses - not development, which is still quite pleasing to see. But my post was regardless of that fact.

                              Developers need to understand that Opera users do exist and they do use the internet. If your websites that you make become popular, obviously visitors who use Opera, and other non-IE/firefox browsers will increase.

                              As for time spent coding for compatibility, it shouldn't really make much difference. Developers should rightly test simultaneously across as many browsers during development - you never know, something may be rendered incorrectly by the browsers that you use which may be fixed, and end up showing things the way these less significant browsers do.

                              It is a pain in some instances, but the fact that it looks wrong in one browser makes it seem as if you were not bothered to put in the effort and rushed to get the result, albeit if it works fine. It gives a wrong impression.

                              Your code and design my be absolutely superb in IE and firefox, which it does, but as an Opera user, I wouldn't want to open a different browser to just view/browse a particular website the way it should be.

                              It is somewhat like those sites that will not let you in if you do not use IE. It makes other users just turn away - and it does it to me, that is for certain.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Actually it depends on the site. I have a screen-reader that I use to test sites I do and they do read tabled sites. It depends though on how the tables are used.

                                Originally posted by Faruk
                                And really, table-based layouts are inaccessible. I've just seen live examples of that last week. They really don't work for things like screenreaders, and oftentimes they don't work for visually impaired people either.
                                Kim

                                Comment

                                widgetinstance 262 (Related Topics) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                                Working...
                                X