Q. Is this group geared toward non-Microsoft platforms?

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Jim Jones, Apr 14, 2004.

  1. Jim Jones

    Jim Jones Guest

    Hi,

    I need to know if this group is geared towards non-Microsoft
    platofrms, ie Internet Explorer.

    Whenever I ask a question here, I'm responded to with "use style
    sheets".

    Well, that's fine, but I don't really want to.

    Are style sheets better suited or Mac, Unix, Linux or something?
    Please explain, what's the reason for suggesting Style Sheets all the
    time.

    To date, I've had no problems for years without them.
    I really need to know.

    Thanks,
    Jim "The un-initiated to style-sheets" Jones
     
    Jim Jones, Apr 14, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Jim Jones

    Kris Guest

    In article <>,
    Jim Jones <> wrote:

    > I need to know if this group is geared towards non-Microsoft
    > platofrms, ie Internet Explorer.


    Except for a few oddballs, this group seems to be geared toward
    authoring for the web, not any platforms or browsers in particular.

    > Whenever I ask a question here, I'm responded to with "use style
    > sheets".


    Maybe you are asking the wrong questions? Anyway, style sheets and
    anti-MSIE sentiment have little in common.

    --
    Kris
    <> (nl)
    <http://www.cinnamon.nl/>
     
    Kris, Apr 14, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Jim Jones

    Hywel Guest

    In article <>,
    says...
    > Hi,
    >
    > I need to know if this group is geared towards non-Microsoft
    > platofrms, ie Internet Explorer.


    No.


    > Whenever I ask a question here, I'm responded to with "use style
    > sheets".
    >
    > Well, that's fine, but I don't really want to.


    Why not?


    > Are style sheets better suited or Mac, Unix, Linux or something?


    No. They're better suited to browsers.


    > Please explain, what's the reason for suggesting Style Sheets all the
    > time.


    To separate style from substance.


    > To date, I've had no problems for years without them.


    Fair enough. I know a lot of COBOL programmers.


    http://www.w3c.org/ is your friend.

    --
    Hywel I do not eat quiche
    http://kibo.org.uk/
    http://kibo.org.uk/mfaq.php
     
    Hywel, Apr 14, 2004
    #3
  4. Jim Jones

    C A Upsdell Guest

    "Jim Jones" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I need to know if this group is geared towards non-Microsoft platofrms, ie

    Internet Explorer.
    >
    > Whenever I ask a question here, I'm responded to with "use style sheets".
    >
    > Well, that's fine, but I don't really want to.


    You don't have to use CSS. Just as you don't have to drive a car: a horse
    and buggy will get you around ... so long as you accept their limitations.

    > Are style sheets better suited or Mac, Unix, Linux or something? Please

    explain, what's the reason for suggesting Style Sheets all the
    > time.


    CSS is a standard. It is not tied to any particular O/S. It is well
    supported by Opera and the Mozilla-based browsers; IE was the most
    CSS-compliant browser for years, but today is a tad behind.

    CSS gives you more profound control over the appearance of your pages, and
    does not force you to use proprietary technologies.

    > To date, I've had no problems for years without them.


    You have had problems. You just haven't realized it.
     
    C A Upsdell, Apr 14, 2004
    #4
  5. Jim Jones

    Richard Guest

    Jim Jones wrote:

    > Hi,


    > I need to know if this group is geared towards non-Microsoft
    > platofrms, ie Internet Explorer.


    > Whenever I ask a question here, I'm responded to with "use style
    > sheets".


    > Well, that's fine, but I don't really want to.


    > Are style sheets better suited or Mac, Unix, Linux or something?
    > Please explain, what's the reason for suggesting Style Sheets all the
    > time.


    > To date, I've had no problems for years without them.
    > I really need to know.


    > Thanks,
    > Jim "The un-initiated to style-sheets" Jones



    The group name is alt.html, not alt.html.css.stylesheets.
    Although some in the group oppose the use of tables and frames, that should
    not be the reason to slap somebody around merely for mentioning the two
    items.
    If one has a question on the use of something that a reader does not approve
    of, the answer should be given without the bullshit demands.
    I personally feel that if a person wants to use tables and frames, then that
    is their choice and do it the way they want done.

    Tables and frames are supported by all browsers. CSS is not.

    If you have a question on html, ask it. Just be prepared to get whacked by
    the proponents of CSS.
     
    Richard, Apr 14, 2004
    #5
  6. Jim Jones

    Whitecrest Guest

    In article <>,
    says...
    > I need to know if this group is geared towards non-Microsoft
    > platofrms, ie Internet Explorer.


    This group is geared towards Web development, that includes MS and non-
    MS development.

    > Whenever I ask a question here, I'm responded to with "use style
    > sheets".
    > Well, that's fine, but I don't really want to.


    when you ask a question, everyone gives you the answer THEY think is
    right. Weight the answers and do what you think is best.

    > Are style sheets better suited or Mac, Unix, Linux or something?
    > Please explain, what's the reason for suggesting Style Sheets all the
    > time.


    Style sheets have no platform. They are for everyone

    > To date, I've had no problems for years without them.
    > I really need to know.


    So continue without them. Again there are all types here, and all
    opinions.

    --
    Whitecrest Entertainment
    www.whitecrestent.com
     
    Whitecrest, Apr 14, 2004
    #6
  7. Richard wrote:

    > The group name is alt.html, not alt.html.css.stylesheets.


    And, on my nntp server at least[1], the description of the group is "Use
    comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html instead" and we pay so much attention
    to that.

    > Although some in the group oppose the use of tables and frames, that


    I don't recall ever seeing anyone in this group oppose the use of tables,
    only the abuse of them.

    > should not be the reason to slap somebody around merely for mentioning the
    > two items.


    Usually they are informed why table abuse and frame use is a bad idea, not
    physically attacked.

    And usually they would have their answer if they bothered to search the
    archives or read the FAQ first.

    > If one has a question on the use of something that a reader does not
    > approve of, the answer should be given without the bullshit demands.


    This is Usenet, not a paid helpdesk. Posters are not required to keep people
    asking questions happy.

    > I personally feel that if a person wants to use tables and frames, then
    > that is their choice and do it the way they want done.


    Well fine. I feel that if a person wants to inform people using frames and
    abusing tables of the problems they might face and suggest better ways then
    they can do that too. I also feel that if someone (or some group, like the
    RNIB) wants to take a person abusing tables or using frames to court using
    the Disabilities Discrimination Act, then thats fine too.

    > Tables and frames are supported by all browsers.


    No they aren't.

    > CSS is not.


    So?

    [1] Is this universal? My knowledge of nntp isn't that great.

    --
    David Dorward <http://blog.dorward.me.uk/> <http://dorward.me.uk/>
     
    David Dorward, Apr 14, 2004
    #7
  8. Jim Jones

    Mitja Guest

    "Jim Jones" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Hi,
    >
    > I need to know if this group is geared towards non-Microsoft
    > platofrms, ie Internet Explorer.
    >
    > Whenever I ask a question here, I'm responded to with "use style
    > sheets".
    >
    > Well, that's fine, but I don't really want to.
    >
    > Are style sheets better suited or Mac, Unix, Linux or something?
    > Please explain, what's the reason for suggesting Style Sheets all the
    > time.
    >
    > To date, I've had no problems for years without them.
    > I really need to know.


    Right.
    See your last post... :)


    > Thanks,
    > Jim "The un-initiated to style-sheets" Jones
    >
     
    Mitja, Apr 14, 2004
    #8
  9. Jim Jones

    C A Upsdell Guest

    "Richard" <Anonymous@127.001> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > Tables and frames are supported by all browsers. CSS is not.


    Opera has options to disable frames and/or iframes. Amaya does not support
    frames.

    Old browsers, notably NN4, do not support iframes.

    It is irrelevant that some browsers (e.g. NN3) do not support CSS, or do not
    support CSS well (e.g. NN4). A good designer can design using much CSS in
    such a way that pages gracefully degrade with deficient browsers.
     
    C A Upsdell, Apr 14, 2004
    #9
  10. Jim Jones

    Whitecrest Guest

    In article <KLhfc.14558$2oI1.13734
    @twister01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>, cupsdell0311XXX@- says...
    > > Tables and frames are supported by all browsers. CSS is not.

    > Opera has options to disable frames and/or iframes. Amaya does not support
    > frames.


    First Opera DOES support frames, it allows you to disable that, so it is
    user choice in those instances. As for Amaya, well the 8 of you have
    made a decision to use a handicapped browser.
    --
    Whitecrest Entertainment
    www.whitecrestent.com
     
    Whitecrest, Apr 14, 2004
    #10
  11. Jim Jones

    Neal Guest

    On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 18:56:02 GMT, Jim Jones <>
    wrote:

    > Hi,
    >
    > I need to know if this group is geared towards non-Microsoft
    > platofrms, ie Internet Explorer.


    It's geared toward designing for the WWW, not for (or against) any
    particular browser.

    > Whenever I ask a question here, I'm responded to with "use style
    > sheets".
    >
    > Well, that's fine, but I don't really want to.


    If I advise using CSS, it's because I really feel it's the best option.
    Sorry, if you don't want to, say so in your question.

    Just curious - WHY do you bot really want to use CSS?

    > Are style sheets better suited or Mac, Unix, Linux or something?
    > Please explain, what's the reason for suggesting Style Sheets all the
    > time.


    They are suited for any modern graphic (and other) browser. The reason
    they are recommended is because often they are what is the best tool to
    accomplish the task.

    > To date, I've had no problems for years without them.
    > I really need to know.


    Being self-titled as "uninitiated", let me initiate you.

    I never used CSS until a few years ago, and even then I used them only a
    little. I for years relied on presentational HTML for my webpages. I used
    tables for layout. I used frames. And I thought it worked ok, until the
    day I saw it through other browsers and browsing situations, not like my
    own.

    I designed web pages which looked great in IE 5. When IE 6 came out, they
    fell to pieces. I found I could re-design the pages to look good in both.
    The key - design to the W3C standards, using modern HTML and - you guessed
    it - style sheets.

    I'm being honest here - the future of web design involves learning
    everything CSS has to offer. I'm one of those who doesn't use tables for
    layout, but who isn't mortally offended if someone else does - so long as
    they are aware that CSS can do many things better than tables.

    Is CSS the cure-all for web presentation? No, but as the web design model
    is squarely heading toward near complete separation of content and
    presentation, including presentation in the HTML is going to be out of
    date in a very short while.

    The train is leaving the station, friend. All aboard...
     
    Neal, Apr 14, 2004
    #11
  12. David Dorward wrote:
    > Richard wrote:

    [snip]
    >> Although some in the group oppose the use of tables and frames, that

    >
    > I don't recall ever seeing anyone in this group oppose the use of
    > tables, only the abuse of them.


    But *they* assume they know what "abuse" of tables is! Apparently, without
    feeling the need to prove their case. Others simply feel this is "use" of
    tables, with plenty of historical & other justification.

    >> should not be the reason to slap somebody around merely for
    >> mentioning the two items.

    >
    > Usually they are informed why table abuse and frame use is a bad
    > idea, not physically attacked.


    I rarely, if ever, see useful statements about why use of layout tables is a
    bad idea. When I do see statements, they tend not to stand up to scrutiny. In
    fact, I don't think I've seen a useful definition of what a layout table
    actually is.

    And "abuse", without supporting evidence, is just a silly word that people use
    when they haven't got a *real* argument that will stand up to scrutiny.

    [snip]
    >> I personally feel that if a person wants to use tables and frames,
    >> then that is their choice and do it the way they want done.

    >
    > Well fine. I feel that if a person wants to inform people using
    > frames and abusing tables of the problems they might face and suggest
    > better ways then they can do that too. I also feel that if someone
    > (or some group, like the RNIB) wants to take a person abusing tables
    > or using frames to court using the Disabilities Discrimination Act,
    > then thats fine too.

    [snip]

    It has been known since April 1999 that a linearising browser can handle
    layout tables. Such pages are quite safe from prosecution for that reason.
    Here are the most reported problems:

    TABLE 6: CHECKPOINTS ACCOUNTING FOR MOST REPORTED PROBLEMS
    Checkpoint Priority

    1.1 Provide a text equivalent for every non-text element 1

    2.2 Ensure that foreground and background colour combinations provide
    sufficient contrast when viewed by someone having colour deficits or when
    viewed on a black and white screen 2/3

    6.3 Ensure that pages are usable when scripts, applets, or other programmatic
    objects are turned off or not supported. If this is not possible, provide
    equivalent information on an alternative accessible page 1

    7.3 Until user agents allow users to freeze moving content, avoid movement in
    pages 2

    10.1 Until user agents allow users to turn off spawned windows, do not cause
    pop-ups or other windows to appear and do not change the current window
    without informing the user 2

    12.3 Divide large blocks of information into more manageable groups where
    natural and appropriate 2

    13.1 Clearly identify the target of each link 2

    14.1 Use the clearest and simplest language appropriate for a site's content 1

    Disability Rights Commission news item:
    http://www.drc-gb.org/newsroom/newsdetails.asp?id=633&section=1
    Report at:
    http://www.drc-gb.org/publicationsandreports/report.asp

    --
    Barry Pearson
    http://www.Barry.Pearson.name/photography/
    http://www.BirdsAndAnimals.info/
    http://www.ChildSupportAnalysis.co.uk/
     
    Barry Pearson, Apr 14, 2004
    #12
  13. Jim Jones

    Mark Parnell Guest

    On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 21:39:21 +0100, David Dorward <>
    declared in alt.html:

    > And, on my nntp server at least[1], the description of the group is "Use
    > comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html instead" and we pay so much attention
    > to that.

    <snip>
    > [1] Is this universal? My knowledge of nntp isn't that great.


    Says the same here. I always thought it was set in my newsreader, but I
    could be wrong...

    --
    Mark (who knows even less than David about nntp) Parnell
    http://www.clarkecomputers.com.au
     
    Mark Parnell, Apr 14, 2004
    #13
  14. Jim Jones

    Poison Guest

    "Whitecrest" wrote in message
    > > Tables and frames are supported by all browsers. CSS is not.
    > > Opera has options to disable frames and/or iframes. Amaya does not

    support
    > > frames.

    >
    > First Opera DOES support frames, it allows you to disable that, so it is
    > user choice in those instances. As for Amaya, well the 8 of you have
    > made a decision to use a handicapped browser.


    He didn't say that Opera DIDNT??? he said *Opera has _options_ to _disable_
    frames and/or iframes.*

    but nice comment on the Amaya, hehe made me chuckle.
     
    Poison, Apr 14, 2004
    #14
  15. Jim Jones wrote:

    > I need to know if this group is geared towards non-Microsoft
    > platofrms, ie Internet Explorer.
    >
    > Whenever I ask a question here, I'm responded to with "use style
    > sheets".


    How does saying "use style sheets" make someone anti-Microsoft. There are
    plenty of Windows browsers that support style sheets -- even (shock!
    horror!) Internet Explorer, which as C A Upsdell pointed out was once the
    market leader in style sheet technology.

    --
    Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
    Contact Me - http://www.goddamn.co.uk/tobyink/?page=132
     
    Toby A Inkster, Apr 14, 2004
    #15
  16. David Dorward wrote:

    > And, on my nntp server at least[1], the description of the group is "Use
    > comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html instead" and we pay so much attention
    > to that.


    Newsgroup descriptions are more or less synchronised across news servers,
    though I don't think there's any rule that says they must be.

    --
    Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
    Contact Me - http://www.goddamn.co.uk/tobyink/?page=132
     
    Toby A Inkster, Apr 14, 2004
    #16
  17. Jim Jones

    brucie Guest

    in post: <news:c5k7fr$7q4$1$>
    David Dorward <> said:

    >> The group name is alt.html, not alt.html.css.stylesheets.


    > And, on my nntp server at least[1], the description of the group is "Use
    > comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html instead" and we pay so much attention
    > to that.


    "This group was neither proposed nor discussed on alt.config. If it had
    been, the proponent would have first been directed to the alt creation
    guidelines where he could learn why the name is so poor. Then he would
    have been directed to the comp.infosystems.www hierarchy, where there
    are many groups on this topic, including one specifically devoted to
    writing HTML."

    link is dead and i cant find a new one
    ftp://ftp.uu.net/usenet/control/alt/alt.html

    --
    b r u c i e
     
    brucie, Apr 15, 2004
    #17
  18. Jim Jones

    Jim Jones Guest

    On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 18:56:02 GMT, Jim Jones
    <> wrote:

    >Hi,
    >
    >I need to know if this group is geared towards non-Microsoft
    >platofrms, ie Internet Explorer.
    >
    >Whenever I ask a question here, I'm responded to with "use style
    >sheets".
    >
    >Well, that's fine, but I don't really want to.
    >
    >Are style sheets better suited or Mac, Unix, Linux or something?
    >Please explain, what's the reason for suggesting Style Sheets all the
    >time.
    >
    >To date, I've had no problems for years without them.
    >I really need to know.
    >
    >Thanks,
    >Jim "The un-initiated to style-sheets" Jones



    I read most of the posts, but not all, I didnt expect to cause this
    much controversey.

    I will use style sheets.

    Thanks so much for the opulent attention.

    Jim
     
    Jim Jones, Apr 15, 2004
    #18
  19. In article
    <KLhfc.14558$>, "C A
    Upsdell" <cupsdell0311XXX@-@> wrote:

    > Old browsers, notably NN4, do not support iframes.


    In fact, my NN4 on an old Mac crashes my machine when it encounters
    iframes. I've lost so much interest in NN4 that I don't even bother to
    supply "much" (going for "no") styling for it anymore. Consequently,
    people using NN4 on my sites may see the Net as I remember it in 1994 for
    the most part. Gray background, black foreground, one block element before
    another. This group weaned me from frames and iframes a long time ago.

    leo

    --
    <http://web0.greatbasin.net/~leo/>
     
    Leonard Blaisdell, Apr 15, 2004
    #19
  20. Barry Pearson wrote:

    > I rarely, if ever, see useful statements about why use of layout tables is a
    > bad idea. When I do see statements, they tend not to stand up to scrutiny. In
    > fact, I don't think I've seen a useful definition of what a layout table
    > actually is.


    Top 10 reasons for not using layout tables:

    10. You don't want to upset Brucie.

    9. Layout is a presentation matter. HTML (and thus the <table> tag!) is
    designed for marking up a document's structure -- not for specifying how
    it looks.

    8. Tables can introduce accessibility problems (although these are often
    overstated!)

    7. As with all things CSS, it is useful to have all your styling in one
    place so if you want to, say, move your navigation bar from the right to
    the left, you don't need to edit 100 different HTML files: just one CSS
    file.

    6. As the HTML is simpler, it is easier to read and write.

    5. Different style sheets can be provided for different media types
    automatically. A page can look great on screen, and great on paper without
    the visitor having to follow a link to another page. Then you can have
    another style sheet for handhelds so narrow displays get the benefit of a
    single column version of a design.

    4. If tables were always used strictly for marking up tabular data, we
    would now have some pretty nifty spreadsheet-like features in browsers --
    sort alphabetically by table column, automatic totals of numeric cell
    ranges, click on a table cell to highlight the appropriate row and column
    headers, etc. I want these features. So everybody! only use tables for
    marking up tabular data!

    3. User agents can cache style sheets, and pages using style sheets for
    layout are (in my experience) always smaller then the equivalent table
    abuse. This means faster loading pages, and cheaper bandwidth bills.

    2. Many browsers wait to download "</table>" before even beginning to
    render the table. This can cause delays in rendering pages.

    1. Every time you use a table for layout a puppy dies.

    ________
    References:
    <>
    <>
    <bnt2v8$jmv$1$>

    --
    Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
    Contact Me - http://www.goddamn.co.uk/tobyink/?page=132
     
    Toby A Inkster, Apr 15, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Charles A. Lackman
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    1,460
    smith
    Dec 8, 2004
  2. SpamProof
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    655
    SpamProof
    Oct 21, 2003
  3. David Delony
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    285
    Roland Pibinger
    Jul 21, 2007
  4. Matt Pelletier
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    240
    Nikolai Weibull
    Apr 17, 2005
  5. Richard Shea
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    403
    Steven D'Aprano
    Apr 19, 2012
Loading...

Share This Page