Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: CSS

Expand Messages
  • Jordan
    In case you were looking for workaround suggestions, a # immediately preceding a property is ignored by IE but not by Firefox. - it would be nice if when
    Message 1 of 11 , Oct 7, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      In case you were looking for workaround suggestions, a # immediately
      preceding a property is ignored by IE but not by Firefox.
      - it would be nice if when throwing an error on a property like
      "overflow-y" if there was an error message that indicated which
      browsers it works with.
      - "cursor: alias !important" gives errors on "alias" which works in
      Firefox ( http://webdesign.about.com/od/styleproperties/a/aa060607.htm
      ). This throws an error on "!important", but since the importance
      works fine on other lines, I assume the "alias" is messing it up.
      - "font-variant: small-caps;" isn't valid?
      - "blue { color: #003399 !important; }" throws an error because I
      invented my own tag name, ie <blue>text</blue>. This is invalid XHTML
      I know, but why is it invalid CSS?
      - "background:#FFFFFF none repeat scroll 0%;" the % throws an error.
      Are percentages invalid?
      - "opacity: 0.92;" opacity works in Firefox, and "filter:
      alpha(opacity=92);" works in IE ( http://www.codeave.com/CSS/code.asp?
      u_log=4017 describes the two, plus that in IE elements must be
      positioned to have the filter)

      I know these are all browser hacks, but I'd love to hear your
      thoughts.

      --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, "Douglas Crockford" <douglas@...>
      wrote:
      >
      > I have added CSS2 support to JSLint. This was motivated by the
      > security needs of ADsafe. Only by fully parsing the CSS content on a
      > page can we be confident that the CSS does not contain hidden
      script.
      >
      > CSS, unlike JavaScript, does not appear to include a usefully
      > sufficient "good parts" subset. The most common patterns necessarily
      > go the other way, extending CSS with horrible, browser-specific
      > workarounds.
      >
      > JSLint now has a 'css' option which will suppress some of the
      warnings
      > that are generated by the use of these workarounds.
      >
      > I expect it will take a while to fully conform JSLint to the reality
      > of CSS. Your patience is appreciated.
      >
    • Douglas Crockford
      ... I feel like I ve opened a can of worms. I m not confident that a Code Quality tool makes sense for CSS. The fact that a form is tolerated by only one brand
      Message 2 of 11 , Oct 7, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, "Jordan" <ljharb@...> wrote:
        > I know these are all browser hacks, but I'd love to hear your
        > thoughts.

        I feel like I've opened a can of worms. I'm not confident that a Code
        Quality tool makes sense for CSS. The fact that a form is tolerated by
        only one brand of browser should indicate that the form should be
        avoided. But for CSS, it becomes a best practice.
      • Jordan
        ... Code ... by ... Very good point... the problem is that in Javascript, functionality in forms that should be avoided can be accomplished a variety of
        Message 3 of 11 , Oct 7, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, "Douglas Crockford" <douglas@...>
          wrote:
          >
          > --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, "Jordan" <ljharb@> wrote:
          > > I know these are all browser hacks, but I'd love to hear your
          > > thoughts.
          >
          > I feel like I've opened a can of worms. I'm not confident that a
          Code
          > Quality tool makes sense for CSS. The fact that a form is tolerated
          by
          > only one brand of browser should indicate that the form should be
          > avoided. But for CSS, it becomes a best practice.
          >

          Very good point... the problem is that in Javascript, functionality in
          "forms that should be avoided" can be accomplished a variety of ways.
          In CSS, quite a lot of functionality can only be accessed with those
          deprecated forms.

          While I'm also not confident that a code quality tool makes sense, a
          tool that checks CSS for validity based on a subset of browsers, and
          reports which features work for which browsers, and eases creating
          browser hacks, would be very useful. Also, anytime validators/lints
          exist, I run them on my code fanatically.
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.