808Re: [NTO] Blockquote
- Aug 22, 2000Scott Fordin wrote:
> As alluded above, the thing to remember about stylesheets is that youYes, this is what I try to do, use stylesheets as much as possible but
> still need to make your base code look good in case the stylesheet is
> unavailable, or the reader's browser can't handle it, or if the reader has
> disabled stylesheets in their browser. To say it another way, your code --
> as with all program code -- should be able to fail gracefully.
make sure it still looks decent on an older browser. Unfortunately, this
prevents using stylesheets to their maximum potential. For example, you
can't define fonts using both HTML and stylesheets. Well, I guess you
can but the results probably won't be pretty.
> Ah, there's rub: the "recommendations" promulgated by the W3C are intendedI would agree to a point. I don't think one organization should have
> to inculcate cross-platform, cross-browser compatibility -- a.k.a. "open
> standards." Proprietary extensions to HTML and XML are evil and should be
> resisted at all costs! Microsoft is notorious about pushing proprietary
> extensions (yes, Netscape has done it also, but not as much, especially
> not lately), and then embedding those extensions in their authoring tools.
> This is clearly an effort to usurp the HTML (and now XML) standards.
absolute control over how software is written. Some of the extensions
Netscape added eventually became part of the standard, because they were
good ones. It would like to see all browsers be 100% compatible with the
standard. Then if they want to add extensions that's fine, as long as
people know they're the only ones that support them. Right now, most
browsers don't even fully support the standard, so cross-platform,
cross-browser compatibility is a joke.
And before we knock M$ too much (I've done my share!) I will say that
they're a lot better about supporting stylesheets than Netscape was/is.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>