This is Interesting: Free Magazines for Graphics designers and webmasters
Home > Archive > Stylesheets > February 2004 > Newbie:CSS & browsers compatibility
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Newbie:CSS & browsers compatibility
|
|
| Patrick 2004-02-08, 3:30 pm |
| Hi
I am just taking my first steps with creating a webpage.I am trying to
use only HTML and css at this time.All goes fairly well in I.E 6.0 but
when i look in N.N 7.1 or Mozilla 1.4 things don't go as well.
I have been searching the web and usenet for articles dealing with
browsers compatibilities and CSS and also consulted the FAQ prior to
post here.
I have found good stuff on devedge, quirksmode, w3, ddj.com, westciv
but still am pretty much confused.
How do you build a webpage using CSS and having it being compatible in
all browsers?
1)Do i need to use javascript and an if statement to branch my styles
depending on browser detection?
2)Create one style fits all?
Do i have to consult CSS compatibility charts for each browsers for
any CSS property i use?
If anybody can point to a user friendly tutorial/guide on that
particular subject, i would appreciate it?
Thanks a lot
Patrick
vaindioux@NOSPAM.yahoo.com
| |
|
| Patrick wrote:
>
> I am just taking my first steps with creating a webpage.I am trying to
> use only HTML and css at this time.
As opposed to before, when you used...?
> All goes fairly well in I.E 6.0 but
> when i look in N.N 7.1 or Mozilla 1.4 things don't go as well.
Most likely, Mozilla has it right, MSIE has it wrong.
> I have been searching the web and usenet for articles dealing with
> browsers compatibilities and CSS and also consulted the FAQ prior to
> post here.
Um, I am a bit skeptical. Your questions have been discussed numerous
times in this newsgroup. And the web has loads of material on css.
http://www.google.com/search?q=brow...mpatibility+css
The top links are all useful.
> I have found good stuff on devedge, quirksmode, w3, ddj.com, westciv
> but still am pretty much confused.
search also for:
quirks vs. standards mode
css box model
css box model hack
> How do you build a webpage using CSS and having it being compatible in
> all browsers?
By hiding styles from browsers that screw things up. And you hide
styles by exploiting parsing bugs.
http://w3development.de/css/hide_css_from_browsers/
> 1)Do i need to use javascript and an if statement to branch my styles
> depending on browser detection?
Good gosh no. Some users have js disabled/unavailable to them. Browser
detection is extremely unreliable.
Stick with the KISS principle.
> 2)Create one style fits all?
Sort of. But hiding styles from buggy browsers is pretty safe. That's
how you tailor your css.
> Do i have to consult CSS compatibility charts for each browsers for
> any CSS property i use?
It might be helpful.
> If anybody can point to a user friendly tutorial/guide on that
> particular subject,
http://devedge.netscape.com/library...03/css-support/
http://macedition.com/cb/resources/...csssupport.html
> i would appreciate it?
No problem. And we'd appreciate it if you'd consult the faq (which,
admittedly, is out of date, but is being updated right now), and
search Google Groups. Your questions are fairly common. You'll find
lots of useful reading in the archives on box model, MSIE, etc.
If you have questions specific to your site, post a url and someone
will have a look-see.
Good luck.
--
Brian (follow directions in my address to email me)
http://www.tsmchughs.com/
| |
| Patrick 2004-02-10, 7:29 pm |
| Brian <usenet3@julietremblay.com.invalid-remove-this-part> wrote
>
> As opposed to before, when you used...?
I know what i wrote looks stupid but what i was trying to say was that
i wouldn't use any javascript in my source or any software to create
nice looking graphics, that's all i was trying to say.HTML and CSS
only.
> search also for:
> quirks vs. standards mode
> css box model
> css box model hack
I have come across CSS hacks often and didn't know what it was.I get
distracted easily on the web during searches so i try not to click on
stuff i don't need yet.If i had known, i would have clicked on any CSS
hacks links.
>
> By hiding styles from browsers that screw things up. And you hide
> styles by exploiting parsing bugs.
Now if i didn't post here and a very nice person (yes you the one that
answered my post)answered these lines above, how long would it take me
to figure out what i have to do.I would have probably used Javascript
to detect browsers and so on which would have been a waste of time.
> Stick with the KISS principle.
What is the KISS principle?Do i have to call Gene and ask him?
> If you have questions specific to your site, post a url and someone
> will have a look-see.
I don't have the site online.I work only on my HD right now.I might
paste the source in a few days if i still can't fix it.
I have decided to read the whole CSS2 reference on the w3 site.I
thought i knew enough but i realize i don't.
Thanks so much for the kind help, you put me on the right tracks and
with my limited study time, that's big help.
Regards
Patrick
| |
| Firas D. 2004-02-10, 9:29 pm |
| Patrick wrote:
> I have decided to read the whole CSS2 reference on the w3 site.
That's where I started learning about CSS.
Then I tried using hat I learned there :(
| |
|
|
| Brian 2004-02-10, 10:29 pm |
| Patrick wrote:
>
> What is the KISS principle?
Keep It Simple, Stupid
I think everyone has taken some project and made it far more
complicated then it needed to be. And afterwards, said, "boy was that
stupid." Hence the phrase.
> Do i have to call Gene and ask him?
I'd ask Paul first, but that's me.
Good luck learning css.
--
Brian (follow directions in my address to email me)
http://www.tsmchughs.com/
| |
| Patrick 2004-02-11, 9:30 pm |
| "Firas D." wrote
>
> That's where I started learning about CSS.
>
> Then I tried using what I learned there :(
What do you mean?You couldn't get anything accomplished with it?I hope
you can explain a little.
Thanks
Patrick
| |
|
|
| Firas D. 2004-02-15, 12:28 am |
| Patrick wrote:
> "Firas D." wrote
>
>
>
>
> What do you mean?You couldn't get anything accomplished with it?I hope
> you can explain a little.
CSS2 hasn't been implemented completely anywhere. Reading the specs at
the start can lull you into thinking that what they say UAs should do is
what UAs do.
| |
| Spartanicus 2004-02-15, 5:28 am |
| "Firas D." <fd-nospam-@firasd.org> wrote:
>CSS2 hasn't been implemented completely anywhere.
And it never will be, because it makes no sense to include for example
the aural part of CSS2 in a visual browser.
Opera's CSS2 implementation is virtually complete:
http://www.opera.com/docs/specs/#css
--
Spartanicus
| |
|
| On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 08:53:44 +0000,
Spartanicus <me@privacy.net> wrote:
> it makes no sense to include for example the aural part of CSS2 in
> a visual browser.
Actually, it does. You could make a browser that covers both
techniques, and different people, with different needs, might use the
same browsers, in different ways to suit themselves.
--
My "from" address is totally fake. The reply-to address is real, but
may be only temporary. Reply to usenet postings in the same place as
you read the message you're replying to.
This message was sent without a virus, please delete some files yourself.
| |
| Spartanicus 2004-02-15, 12:29 pm |
| Tim <Tim@mail.localhost> wrote:
>
>Actually, it does.
Not in a *visual* browser, if a manufacturer wants to put out a strictly
visual browser then there is no point in adding aural css.
--
Spartanicus
| |
|
| Unattributed authors wrote:
Tim <Tim@mail.localhost> wrote:
[color=blue]
Spartanicus <me@privacy.net> wrote:
[color=blue]
> Not in a *visual* browser, if a manufacturer wants to put out a strictly
> visual browser then there is no point in adding aural css.
Let's say, for example, that you work in a school. In that school you
have sighted and unsighted students. What's far easier? One browser
which works for everybody, or two different browsers. One purely
visual, and one purely aural. Now ask the sighted staff to help an
unsighted student use an aural browser. Granted that it gives the staff
more insight into the students problem, but it's a lot harder to assist
them to use the program if there's no visual interface. And granted
that specialised software might have other advantages, but one thing
that does it all well would still be a good thing.
Transfer that situation to other places, like libraries, and it's the
same thing. Do blind users have VDUs with their computers? Yes, many
do. Do they need it? No. Someone else might use it, though.
Yes, there is a point to a visual browser supporting aural features.
It's just that you don't see it. (Pun intended.)
--
My "from" address is totally fake. The reply-to address is real, but
may be only temporary. Reply to usenet postings in the same place as
you read the message you're replying to.
This message was sent without a virus, please delete some files yourself.
| |
| Eric Bohlman 2004-02-16, 1:30 pm |
| Tim <Tim@mail.localhost> wrote in
news:99l130phb1qmdlh55nq0uvu3rvt34oe3s0@4ax.com:
> Let's say, for example, that you work in a school. In that school you
> have sighted and unsighted students. What's far easier? One browser
> which works for everybody, or two different browsers. One purely
> visual, and one purely aural. Now ask the sighted staff to help an
> unsighted student use an aural browser. Granted that it gives the staff
> more insight into the students problem, but it's a lot harder to assist
> them to use the program if there's no visual interface. And granted
> that specialised software might have other advantages, but one thing
> that does it all well would still be a good thing.
One problem is that most of the aural properties in CSS require a fair
amount of direct interaction with the speech synthesizer itself to
implement, since they involve altering speech parameters. The problem here
is that most blind users are already running a screen reader which is
already in control of the speech synthesizer, so the two programs would be
stepping on each other.
Another problem is that most of the aural properties aren't of much use to
blind users anyway, and would actually get in their way. Most blind users
have distinct preferences for things like tone and speech rate (if you've
ever heard what a proficient speech user hears, you wouldn't be able to
make sense of it because they have it going so fast) and set them
themselves. Giving authors the ability to override those preferences would
actually be detrimental; most blind computer users would react to it the
same way most of us react to attempts by authors to "play outside the
sandbox."
As I see it, the aural properties are mostly appropriate for "passive user"
applications like reading pages over the phone, broadcasting the contents
of documents on low-power radio stations like the ones that give continuous
traffic reports, letting someone listen to his PDA reading an e-book while
he's driving, or managing the audio part of a museum display, rather than
providing access to blind people who use general-purpose computers that do
things other than browse the Web. All of these are cases where the user
can't interactively adjust the speech parameters, so the author has to do
it. It's pretty much analogous to the distinction between print design and
Web design; for print and "passive-user" applications the author has to fix
a lot of aspects because the presentation medium lacks intelligence, but
for both visual and speech browser, fixing those aspects reduces usability
(and aesthetics).
| |
| Spartanicus 2004-02-17, 5:29 am |
| Tim <Tim@mail.localhost> wrote:
>
>
>
>Yes, there is a point to a visual browser supporting aural features.
Sigh, not if the UA is *designated* to be a visual browser only. IE, Moz
and Opera are all strictly visual browsers.
--
Spartanicus
|
|
|
| | Copyright 2003 - 2008 forum4designers.com Software forum Computer Hardware reviews |
|