|
My New Web Design / Comments Please (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Vert |
| quote: | Originally posted by moncster
agreed. |
Did I start this agreed thing, or was it someone else? I swear I have about 5 posts that have complete sentances consisting of agreed. :)
es |
|
|
| moncster |
| quote: | Originally posted by Vert
Did I start this agreed thing, or was it someone else? I swear I have about 5 posts that have complete sentances consisting of agreed. :)
es |
me too!
:D |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by moncster
Why require IE5? Follow the damn standards, dammit, and we could display it on all browsers. |
It seems to work fine in Firebird, so I'm going out on a limb and assuming that it says that because he only tested it on IE5.
However, moncster is right, always always ALWAYS follow the W3C standard, NEVER use proprietary components (that includes Flash or IE-specific tags/filters/extensions) if they aren't essential to your design. |
|
|
| Vert |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
It seems to work fine in Firebird, so I'm going out on a limb and assuming that it says that because he only tested it on IE5.
However, moncster is right, always always ALWAYS follow the W3C standard, NEVER use proprietary components (that includes Flash or IE-specific tags/filters/extensions) if they aren't essential to your design. |
Well, I don't always follow w3c to the dot, as dream (I'm too lazy to code all my sites) doesn't like to for some reason, but I always test in as many browsers as I can for compatability. Mozilla, IE, Firebird, Opera, and if you have mac friends, try out some of their browsers.
es |
|
|
| DigiNut |
I tend to say opera, because they can't seem to support ANY standard reliably. As for the others though, you are right. You actually can't follow W3C to the dot, because some W3C tags aren't even supported properly yet, by any major browser (like the object tag). Still, speaking in generalities here.
Personally: wordpad > notepad > dreamweaver > * :D |
|
|
| Vert |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
I tend to say opera, because they can't seem to support ANY standard reliably. As for the others though, you are right. You actually can't follow W3C to the dot, because some W3C tags aren't even supported properly yet, by any major browser (like the object tag). Still, speaking in generalities here.
Personally: wordpad > notepad > dreamweaver > * :D |
Dreamweaver saves me time, lots and lots of time. That and photoshop 7's output feature. I use dreamweaver to decrapify photoshop's code ;). I'm not a coder, i'm a designer ;) (visual person). Eh, I don't use opera, I had it before, but I ditched it. I just listed it for reference. Seems like alot of people are praising it lately around here [ta] though.
es |
|
|
| DigiNut |
Best method I find is to use DW for initial layout, then rewrite any JS code and stylesheets by hand. Helps to keep a library of very commonly used cross-browser code (showing/hiding/repositioning layers, rollovers, tooltips, etc.)
But that's just me. Sorry for the jacking!
P.S. OperaAddicts = wannabe 31337. I used it for 2 months, couldn't get used to how horribly it mangled some pages, POS! |
|
|
| Vert |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
Best method I find is to use DW for initial layout, then rewrite any JS code and stylesheets by hand. Helps to keep a library of very commonly used cross-browser code (showing/hiding/repositioning layers, rollovers, tooltips, etc.)
But that's just me. Sorry for the jacking!
P.S. OperaAddicts = wannabe 31337. I used it for 2 months, couldn't get used to how horribly it mangled some pages, POS! |
Can I see one of your site[s] ?
go firebird ;)
es |
|
|
| moncster |
It doesn't display properly in my moz.
I see the cell borders in the table. |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by Vert
Can I see one of your site[s] ?
go firebird ;)
es |
You could, but I wouldn't be able to take all the credit for any good ones, since they're usually collaborations with graphic designers (my artistic talent is next to nil - I do the technical stuff :p).
Sorry if I gave the impression that I knew what I was talking about in the art department. ;) However, the company site I've been working on will be rolled out in about a week or so, so if you want to be patient, I'd be happy to oblige.
Firebird r00lz. |
|
|
| Vert |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
You could, but I wouldn't be able to take all the credit for any good ones, since they're usually collaborations with graphic designers (my artistic talent is next to nil - I do the technical stuff :p).
Sorry if I gave the impression that I knew what I was talking about in the art department. ;) However, the company site I've been working on will be rolled out in about a week or so, so if you want to be patient, I'd be happy to oblige.
Firebird r00lz. |
Eh, I'd like to see those sites are like regardless, I want to see the calibur of the work in general ;).
es |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by moncster
It doesn't display properly in my moz.
I see the cell borders in the table. |
Yep, I noticed that too but I didn't realize it until I actually checked it in IE.
Rozzer: reason for that is that you tried to take away the border by setting the bordercolor to white - Mozilla and Firebird still show the [black] bevel, though. Just change the border to 0 and that'll be fine.
Vert: I'll get back to you when it's done (very soon), I have a thing about sharing unfinished work. :o |
|
|
|
|
