Comments for Coding and Dreaming

Comment on Emulating IE7 in IE8 by Catalin

Catalin — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 12:30:16 +0000

Great article. I’ve seen a lot of detailed articles and suggestions for Microsoft, though I have just one msg for microsoft, just one. I won’t go into details, I will not say where or why, but very simple, SO simple that’s dummy proof. Here we go: BE STANDARD COMPLIANT!
That is ALL you have to do, not more or less, BUT JUST F…ING BE STANDARD COMPLIANT!

I’m TIRED of ie if conditions and others, I’m sick and tired.
So the IE8 Beta appeared and they are expecting for feedback. WHAT feedback? You get the same damn feedback all the time, be f…ing standard compliant!

Thank you.

Comment on Emulating IE7 in IE8 by Rampage

Rampage — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 16:37:23 +0000

IE 8 is breaking Ajax and javascript applications. These apps are working fine in IE6,IE7, and Firefox 2,3. Microsoft knows this and this is the reason why IE7 emulation is needed. It looks like they completely revamped the javascript engine in IE8.

Comment on Emulating IE7 in IE8 by House

House — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 14:34:27 +0000

Good post, I totally, agree that the button will definately confuse the average user. I havent tried IE8 yet, but the first time I heard about the button, I thought: Oh no, now even though many users will upgrade to IE8, some of them will possibly use it in IE7 emulation mode, still browsing the web with a “non web standards browser”?

Comment on Euuurrggghhh! What’s going on in Safari 3.1? by James Hopkins

James Hopkins — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 07:50:44 +0000

Thanks Gilbert for the suggestions.
I’ll try and come up with some test cases over the weeked, and I’ll update this post with my findings.

Comment on Euuurrggghhh! What’s going on in Safari 3.1? by Gilbert

Gilbert — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 06:17:52 +0000

Sorry to double post, but I just seen the behaviour you describe.

It doesn’t seem to occur in the header on the home page, but when I comment, it appears on these pages. Hope that helps get you closer to the solutions.

Comment on Euuurrggghhh! What’s going on in Safari 3.1? by Gilbert

Gilbert — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 06:14:08 +0000

It looks OK in 3.1 on Windows.

Perhaps it’s choking on the empty #sidebar {} ?? and the placement of your * { margin: 0; padding: 0; } seems odd.

Any user stylesheets enabled?

Have you tried using Eric Meyer’s reset stylesheet at the beginning and then building it up element by element from there?

Comment on Why are we trying to re-invent the wheel? by Peter Gasston

Peter Gasston — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 22:23:12 +0000

James, that may be true, but I don’t think the W3C can just assume that developers have access to programming languages and so not develop CSS features based on that assumption; CSS has to exist based on the assumption that the developer has client-side access only.

Comment on Why are we trying to re-invent the wheel? by James Hopkins

James Hopkins — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 20:10:30 +0000

@Peter: Indeed so, but I think considering the possible demographic who would utilise this feature (authors seeking to create theming consistency over a large number of pages), I would suggest that they would have access to some kind of server-side language.

@Daniel: Even though it’s a little vague, if I can take Ian’s proposed syntax on his list of suggested extensions as an example, where he uses utilises the keyword ‘orange’ as the identifier.

Although this particular ‘color’ example does present a fallback option (to a certain extent) for UA’s that wouldn’t understand the proposed Symbolic Constants, my opinion is that it’s far from ideal. With the ‘color’ property in mind, authors would have to be careful about matching up a particular keyword value (’orange’) with the same or similar hex value within the constant (with the keyword value in the element declaration acting as the fallback). The relatively small range of ‘color’ keywords that are defined in the Level 2.1 spec (in addition to system colors, which would work in this environment but due to their very nature are unsuitable (they’re also deprecated in Level 3 Color module)) mean that we are fairly restricted to the number of ‘color’ keywords we can use as identifiers, whilst at the same time making sure we’re careful to match each keyword with a corresponding hexdec.

In an environment where keyword identifiers don’t exist and where only string values can be used (take the ‘border-size’ property for example), I fail to see in this particular instance, how a fallback option can exist; a new variable value would need to be created and inserted into the ‘border’ property, like border:$key_color solid black - this variable name of course wouldn’t be understood by browsers which don’t support this Symbolic Constants feature.

Comment on Why are we trying to re-invent the wheel? by Daniel Glazman

Daniel Glazman — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 05:11:37 +0000

Not bad for a 1st of April’s fool
More seriously, I am not sure I understand what you mean here about lack of fallback.

Comment on Why are we trying to re-invent the wheel? by Peter Gasston

Peter Gasston — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 23:09:42 +0000

James, using a server-side solution is fine for those that work in an environment where they are able to use it - that is, where you are writing PHP, ASP, or similar - but it doesn’t help those creating style sheets where only client-side access is available. Using variables was the single most requested feature when the W3C undertook a recent consultation, so I think it only fair that the W3C look into the practicality of making this a recommendation.