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

Re: [NTO] 20 Things I Learned

Expand Messages
  • loro
    ... Glad you liked it. :-) I can read and navigate the site perfectly fine in IE5 and so I can in OffByOne that doesn t support anything except plain old HTML.
    Message 1 of 6 , Nov 18, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      At 22:59 2010-11-18, Axel Berger wrote:
      >loro wrote:
      > > You need a very recent browser.
      >
      >In that case, it's NOT html5. Graceful degradition and full basic
      >functionality without support for added glitz and functionality are
      >essential and obligatory parts of correct HTML5. That site failed -
      >dismally.

      Glad you liked it. :-)

      I can read and navigate the site perfectly fine in IE5 and so I can
      in OffByOne that doesn't support anything except plain old HTML.
      Graceful degradation isn't about making things look exactly the same
      and work exactly the same way in every user agent, it's about making
      it work and not leave the site unusable.

      Lotta
    • Axel Berger
      ... Exactly. I now tried it in my full set of four browsers, though not the new ones on the eXPerimental machine, I d have to boot first. Netscape 4.8 with NO
      Message 2 of 6 , Nov 18, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        loro wrote:
        > it's about making it work and not leave the site unusable.

        Exactly. I now tried it in my full set of four browsers, though not the
        new ones on the eXPerimental machine, I'd have to boot first.

        Netscape 4.8 with NO CSS and NO graphics. Yes you're right, there is
        some content and it is legible. But a fallback to barest HTML can be
        much better.

        Firefox 1.5.0.12 and IE 5.5: Totally illegible and nearly unusable. At
        least half the content is written somewhere outside the window with no
        scrolling provided. The reason seems to be that, of course, scripting is
        off. Sorry but this is NO acceptable fallback, it's a sham and a
        disgrace.

        Opera 9.27. This is my browser for viewing things as the "designer"
        wanted them to. No minimum font size, no minimal colour contrast,
        nothing forbidden. Alright, now I see something somewhat akin to a
        legible layout.

        So I stand by my first statement, this page has no decent fallback and
        needs all the bells and whistles just to provide the bare minimum of
        functionality. It's a throwback to the browser wars of the early
        nineties and the "designer" has learnt nothing whatsoever from that
        debacle.

        Alright, so I am a Scrooge and a Luddite, but new for modernity's sake
        is NOT better. Functionality rules.

        Axel
      • loro
        ... Yeah, newer browsers are harder. The problem is that for a long time IIRC Opera was the only browser that followed the CSS guidelines and offered an easy
        Message 3 of 6 , Nov 20, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          Axel Berger wrote:
          >Firefox 1.5.0.12 and IE 5.5: Totally illegible and nearly unusable.

          Yeah, newer browsers are harder. The problem is that for a long time
          IIRC Opera was the only browser that followed the CSS guidelines and
          offered an easy way for the user the disable CSS. FF does that too
          now. I don't remember when that option was added, but it must have
          been later than 1.5. All the burden of graceful degradation isn't
          supposed to be carried by the author. The amount of so called
          "philters" needed to serve specific style rules to fairly new browser
          would be humongous, if it would even be possible to to it. Not to
          speak of keeping such a monster updated. It wasn't intended to be
          this way, that we would be forced to use hacks.

          >Alright, so I am a Scrooge and a Luddite, but new for modernity's sake
          >is NOT better. Functionality rules.

          Tell me, how do you go about supporting old browsers that only
          understand HTTP 1.0? Or maybe your altruism includes even HTTP 0.9? :-P

          Anyway, I didn't post this as a reason to have yet another discussion
          about this, it never goes anywhere. Just thought it was interesting
          to get a peek of the future and wanted to share. Because believe me,
          the future is coming either we like it or not. That the site also
          happens to be informative doesn't hurt IMO, I learnt something.

          Axel, you are a master in turning a topic to into what you want to
          talk about and away from the original intention with the post. Next
          time I won't bite. I'll try to better myself. Promise! ;-)

          Lotta
        • Axel Berger
          ... Point taken.
          Message 4 of 6 , Nov 20, 2010
          • 0 Attachment
            loro wrote:
            > Axel, you are a master in turning a topic to into what
            > you want to talk about and away from the original intention
            > with the post.

            Point taken.
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.