From: Rob H. <rob...@gm...> - 2009-04-29 18:50:29
|
Greetings: On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Gerald Britton <ger...@gm...>wrote: > quirks mode? What a riot! those funny boys and girls at Microsoft > strike again!! > > Seriously, though, it's dead easy to skip it with the new html > library. Still, I'd rather be standards compliant rather than > Microsoft compliant. And this is just IE6, you say? Probably we can > forget it. What do others think? It isn't that I do not care, but I can't program to make everyone happy! If it were a mainstream browser, then I would say yes, but isn't any longer or is it??? I know that Internet Explorer is giant in the computing world, but is IE6? Sincerely, Rob > > > On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 4:59 PM, Jason Simanek <jsi...@gm...> wrote: > > Some new concern for including an XML declaration in our XHTML > > documents. However, this only involves IE6, so who cares? Anyway, > > thought you'd both like to know: > > > > Using an XML declaration triggers Quirks mode in IE 6 > > > http://www.456bereastreet.com/archive/200904/using_an_xml_declaration_triggers_quirks_mode_in_ie_6/ > > > > > > -- > Gerald Britton > |
From: Aaron R. S. <fuz...@ya...> - 2009-05-01 06:30:02
|
Don't get too worked up. I think by the time you have ie 6, 7 and firefox tested most of the others should fall in line with very little editing especially if you keep things simple. I think there are some tools that can help test how things look across multiple browsers. If I recall there is a (plugin?) for firefox to show ie output at the very least. a quick google search brought this up. a quick test looked promising but I've never seriously tried it. http://browsershots.org/ ________________________________ From: Rob Healey <rob...@gm...> To: Gramps Development List <gra...@li...> Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 10:16:24 PM Subject: [Gramps-devel] XML Declaration in XHTML Greetings: On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 9:15 PM, Duncan Lithgow <dun...@gm...> wrote: 2009/5/1 Aaron R. Short <fuz...@ya...>: > lol well maybe not the "lowest" but at least ie 6 and greater, firefox, and > now chrome. Let's not forget Safari - which renders more compliantly than most, and can be installed on windows. So I guess IE6 and above, firefox 3 and above, chrome, safari, and Opera ... is that the end of the list??? Will the WebCal and NarrativeWeb outputs be improved if we remove the <?xml ... /> statement from the top of the document? Does anybody out there have any experience with these browsers and the current output from NarrativeWeb, and WebCal, from trunk??? Please respond if you can help??? Sincerely Yours, Rob G. Healey Duncan ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Register Now & Save for Velocity, the Web Performance & Operations Conference from O'Reilly Media. Velocity features a full day of expert-led, hands-on workshops and two days of sessions from industry leaders in dedicated Performance & Operations tracks. Use code vel09scf and Save an extra 15% before 5/3. http://p.sf.net/sfu/velocityconf _______________________________________________ Gramps-devel mailing list Gra...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel |
From: Duncan L. <dun...@gm...> - 2009-05-01 11:34:12
|
2009/5/1 Aaron R. Short <fuz...@ya...>: > a quick google search brought this up. a quick test looked promising but > I've never seriously tried it. > http://browsershots.org/ That looked interesting so I set it to work on one of my NarWeb pages (made with 3.1.1), this one: http://lithgow-schmidt.dk/genealogy/ppl/t/r/SI8CX85HZO8MGUVBRT.html I'm off to bed now (23:30 here), but please anyone interested check the page as the screenshots are uploaded: http://browsershots.org/http://lithgow-schmidt.dk/genealogy/ppl/t/r/SI8CX85HZO8MGUVBRT.html You might need to extend the time to get them done. Duncan |
From: Jérôme <rom...@ya...> - 2009-05-01 07:07:38
|
> So I guess IE6 and above, firefox 3 and above, chrome, safari, and Opera ... is that the end of the list??? Can I play ? Amaya, etc ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_web_browsers OK, I -> [] :-[ Rob Healey a écrit : > Greetings: > > > On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 9:15 PM, Duncan Lithgow > <dun...@gm... <mailto:dun...@gm...>> wrote: > > 2009/5/1 Aaron R. Short <fuz...@ya... > <mailto:fuz...@ya...>>: > > lol well maybe not the "lowest" but at least ie 6 and greater, > firefox, and > > now chrome. > > Let's not forget Safari - which renders more compliantly than most, > and can be installed on windows. > > > So I guess IE6 and above, firefox 3 and above, chrome, safari, and Opera > ... is that the end of the list??? Will the WebCal and NarrativeWeb > outputs be improved if we remove the <?xml ... /> statement from the top > of the document? Does anybody out there have any experience with these > browsers and the current output from NarrativeWeb, and WebCal, from > trunk??? > > Please respond if you can help??? > > Sincerely Yours, > Rob G. Healey > > > > > Duncan > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Register Now & Save for Velocity, the Web Performance & Operations > Conference from O'Reilly Media. Velocity features a full day of > expert-led, hands-on workshops and two days of sessions from industry > leaders in dedicated Performance & Operations tracks. Use code vel09scf > and Save an extra 15% before 5/3. http://p.sf.net/sfu/velocityconf > _______________________________________________ > Gramps-devel mailing list > Gra...@li... > <mailto:Gra...@li...> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Register Now & Save for Velocity, the Web Performance & Operations > Conference from O'Reilly Media. Velocity features a full day of > expert-led, hands-on workshops and two days of sessions from industry > leaders in dedicated Performance & Operations tracks. Use code vel09scf > and Save an extra 15% before 5/3. http://p.sf.net/sfu/velocityconf > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Gramps-devel mailing list > Gra...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel |
From: Gerald B. <ger...@gm...> - 2009-05-01 08:31:13
|
So, are we saying that IE6 and below are the only browsers that stumble over the XML declaration? If that is true, then the only question that remains is: Does IE6's quirky rendering make NarWeb look odd and in what way? If not, then there is nothing to be done; if so, then add this just before calling Html.write(): del page[0] where "page" is the HTML object containing the XML declaration. On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 3:08 AM, Jérôme <rom...@ya...> wrote: >> So I guess IE6 and above, firefox 3 and above, chrome, safari, and Opera ... is that the end of the list??? > > Can I play ? > > Amaya, etc ... > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_web_browsers > > OK, I -> [] :-[ > > > > Rob Healey a écrit : >> Greetings: >> >> >> On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 9:15 PM, Duncan Lithgow >> <dun...@gm... <mailto:dun...@gm...>> wrote: >> >> 2009/5/1 Aaron R. Short <fuz...@ya... >> <mailto:fuz...@ya...>>: >> > lol well maybe not the "lowest" but at least ie 6 and greater, >> firefox, and >> > now chrome. >> >> Let's not forget Safari - which renders more compliantly than most, >> and can be installed on windows. >> >> >> So I guess IE6 and above, firefox 3 and above, chrome, safari, and Opera >> ... is that the end of the list??? Will the WebCal and NarrativeWeb >> outputs be improved if we remove the <?xml ... /> statement from the top >> of the document? Does anybody out there have any experience with these >> browsers and the current output from NarrativeWeb, and WebCal, from >> trunk??? >> >> Please respond if you can help??? >> >> Sincerely Yours, >> Rob G. Healey >> >> >> >> >> Duncan >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Register Now & Save for Velocity, the Web Performance & Operations >> Conference from O'Reilly Media. Velocity features a full day of >> expert-led, hands-on workshops and two days of sessions from industry >> leaders in dedicated Performance & Operations tracks. Use code vel09scf >> and Save an extra 15% before 5/3. http://p.sf.net/sfu/velocityconf >> _______________________________________________ >> Gramps-devel mailing list >> Gra...@li... >> <mailto:Gra...@li...> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Register Now & Save for Velocity, the Web Performance & Operations >> Conference from O'Reilly Media. Velocity features a full day of >> expert-led, hands-on workshops and two days of sessions from industry >> leaders in dedicated Performance & Operations tracks. Use code vel09scf >> and Save an extra 15% before 5/3. http://p.sf.net/sfu/velocityconf >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Gramps-devel mailing list >> Gra...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Register Now & Save for Velocity, the Web Performance & Operations > Conference from O'Reilly Media. Velocity features a full day of > expert-led, hands-on workshops and two days of sessions from industry > leaders in dedicated Performance & Operations tracks. Use code vel09scf > and Save an extra 15% before 5/3. http://p.sf.net/sfu/velocityconf > _______________________________________________ > Gramps-devel mailing list > Gra...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel > -- Gerald Britton |
From: Duncan L. <dun...@gm...> - 2009-05-01 11:32:01
|
2009/5/1 Jérôme <rom...@ya...>: >> So I guess IE6 and above, firefox 3 and above, chrome, safari, and Opera ... is that the end of the list??? > > Can I play ? > > Amaya, etc ... > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_web_browsers Amaya is a truly horrible browser, but it did give me this when I sent it to the main page of NarWeb: Blue lines are links activated by a double (or a single) click *** Errors/warnings in http://lithgow-schmidt.dk/genealogy/styles/Web_Mainz.css line 362: Invalid pseudo-element "last-child" line 387: Invalid pseudo-element "last-child" line 970: Invalid float value "center" *** Errors/warnings in http://lithgow-schmidt.dk/genealogy/ line 14, char 2: mismatched tag Duncan |
From: Gerald B. <ger...@gm...> - 2009-05-01 12:34:46
|
Those are CSS errors. We need to fix them On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 7:31 AM, Duncan Lithgow <dun...@gm...> wrote: > 2009/5/1 Jérôme <rom...@ya...>: >>> So I guess IE6 and above, firefox 3 and above, chrome, safari, and Opera ... is that the end of the list??? >> >> Can I play ? >> >> Amaya, etc ... >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_web_browsers > > Amaya is a truly horrible browser, but it did give me this when I sent > it to the main page of NarWeb: > > Blue lines are links activated by a double (or a single) click > *** Errors/warnings in http://lithgow-schmidt.dk/genealogy/styles/Web_Mainz.css > line 362: Invalid pseudo-element "last-child" > line 387: Invalid pseudo-element "last-child" > line 970: Invalid float value "center" > > *** Errors/warnings in http://lithgow-schmidt.dk/genealogy/ > line 14, char 2: mismatched tag > > Duncan > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Register Now & Save for Velocity, the Web Performance & Operations > Conference from O'Reilly Media. Velocity features a full day of > expert-led, hands-on workshops and two days of sessions from industry > leaders in dedicated Performance & Operations tracks. Use code vel09scf > and Save an extra 15% before 5/3. http://p.sf.net/sfu/velocityconf > _______________________________________________ > Gramps-devel mailing list > Gra...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel > -- Gerald Britton |
From: Jason S. <jsi...@gm...> - 2009-05-01 14:03:16
|
All, > > On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 7:31 AM, Duncan Lithgow <dun...@gm...> wrote: > > *** Errors/warnings in > http://lithgow-schmidt.dk/genealogy/styles/Web_Mainz.css > > > line 362: Invalid pseudo-element "last-child" > > > line 387: Invalid pseudo-element "last-child" > > > line 970: Invalid float value "center" On Fri, 2009-05-01 at 08:33 -0400, Gerald Britton wrote: > Those are CSS errors. We need to fix them These aren't CSS errors. They are ‘Structural Pseudo-Classes’ from the W3C’s Selectors Level 3 for CSS3 Working Draft. http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-css3-selectors-20090310/#structural-pseudos Yes, they are not technically a complete W3C Recommendation yet, but the first-child and last-child selectors have been supported in WebKit, Opera and Gecko rendering engines for several years now and even IE7+ supports them. Those three rendering engines are almost all of the popular web browsers in the world. Plus the use of these selectors saves a lot of markup, allowing you to remove redundant borders from the first or last tr or td elements in a table without the use of additional classes in the markup, for instance. The only popular browser that doesn't support these is IE6. I didn't mean to dredge this XML declaration bit up again. I sent a blog post about how IE6 switches to Quirks Mode (not rendering according to XHTML 1.0 standard) to Rob and Gerald because we had discussed the issue a few months ago. That's all. The Decision: We’re putting the declaration in unless we see some massive problems in IE6 due to the Quirks Mode issue. We’re going to follow the W3C Recommendation, but for the record the recommendation says that the XML declaration can be left out if the page is using UTF-8 encoding because it is the default encoding for XML, XHTML being a sub-type of XML. The recommendation only ENCOURAGES the addition of the XML declaration. Okay now. Let’s move on. Have a great Friday/Weekend. -Jason |
From: Gerald B. <ger...@gm...> - 2009-05-01 14:11:42
|
You're half-right that those are not CSS "errors." They're errors if we are aiming for CSS 2.1 compliance, but not if we're aiming for CSS 3 compliance. I can't recall if a decision/mandate was issued on that, but my feeling is that we should stick to 2.1 until 3 is finalized. Apparently Amaya can't do pseudo-classes yet, though Duncan didn't mention which version of Amaya he got the problem on. So, what's the concensus? Stick to CSS 2.1, or shoot for CSS 3? On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 9:41 AM, Jason Simanek <jsi...@gm...> wrote: > All, > >> > On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 7:31 AM, Duncan Lithgow <dun...@gm...> wrote: >> > *** Errors/warnings in >> http://lithgow-schmidt.dk/genealogy/styles/Web_Mainz.css >> > > line 362: Invalid pseudo-element "last-child" >> > > line 387: Invalid pseudo-element "last-child" >> > > line 970: Invalid float value "center" > > On Fri, 2009-05-01 at 08:33 -0400, Gerald Britton wrote: >> Those are CSS errors. We need to fix them > > These aren't CSS errors. They are ‘Structural Pseudo-Classes’ from the > W3C’s Selectors Level 3 for CSS3 Working Draft. > > http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-css3-selectors-20090310/#structural-pseudos > > Yes, they are not technically a complete W3C Recommendation yet, but the > first-child and last-child selectors have been supported in WebKit, > Opera and Gecko rendering engines for several years now and even IE7+ > supports them. Those three rendering engines are almost all of the > popular web browsers in the world. > > Plus the use of these selectors saves a lot of markup, allowing you to > remove redundant borders from the first or last tr or td elements in a > table without the use of additional classes in the markup, for instance. > The only popular browser that doesn't support these is IE6. > > I didn't mean to dredge this XML declaration bit up again. I sent a blog > post about how IE6 switches to Quirks Mode (not rendering according to > XHTML 1.0 standard) to Rob and Gerald because we had discussed the issue > a few months ago. That's all. > > The Decision: We’re putting the declaration in unless we see some > massive problems in IE6 due to the Quirks Mode issue. We’re going to > follow the W3C Recommendation, but for the record the recommendation > says that the XML declaration can be left out if the page is using UTF-8 > encoding because it is the default encoding for XML, XHTML being a > sub-type of XML. The recommendation only ENCOURAGES the addition of the > XML declaration. > > Okay now. Let’s move on. Have a great Friday/Weekend. > > -Jason > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Register Now & Save for Velocity, the Web Performance & Operations > Conference from O'Reilly Media. Velocity features a full day of > expert-led, hands-on workshops and two days of sessions from industry > leaders in dedicated Performance & Operations tracks. Use code vel09scf > and Save an extra 15% before 5/3. http://p.sf.net/sfu/velocityconf > _______________________________________________ > Gramps-devel mailing list > Gra...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel > -- Gerald Britton |
From: Jason S. <jsi...@gm...> - 2009-05-01 20:14:39
|
On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 9:11 AM, Gerald Britton <ger...@gm...> wrote: > Apparently Amaya can't do pseudo-classes yet, though > Duncan didn't mention which version of Amaya he got the problem on. Amaya isn't a widely used browser. If anything it's a development tool that is also created/maintained by the W3C to promote its recommendations. Predictably, Amaya follows the recommendations very strictly. Just try loading a handful of your favorite sites in Amaya and see what you get. Probably a lot of broken websites. Amaya is not a relevant testing rendering engine. I don't even think it's a relevant development tool since it's predominantly a WYSIWYG editor. > So, what's the concensus? Stick to CSS 2.1, or shoot for CSS 3? Well, I'm sure my vote is unsurprising: We should use the W3C Recommendations as guidelines, but otherwise base our work on the most efficient and widely-supported methods available. If all of the major browsers support a given feature then that is ‘The Standard’. The W3C writes Recommendations, not Standards. -Jason |
From: Gerald B. <ger...@gm...> - 2009-05-01 20:26:26
|
Good point re standards vs recommendations. If we're going for widely-implemented, we can use css 3 as our reference, which as you pointed out earlier can make life easier and css files smaller. On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 4:14 PM, Jason Simanek <jsi...@gm...> wrote: > On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 9:11 AM, Gerald Britton <ger...@gm...> wrote: >> Apparently Amaya can't do pseudo-classes yet, though >> Duncan didn't mention which version of Amaya he got the problem on. > > Amaya isn't a widely used browser. If anything it's a development tool > that is also created/maintained by the W3C to promote its > recommendations. Predictably, Amaya follows the recommendations very > strictly. Just try loading a handful of your favorite sites in Amaya > and see what you get. Probably a lot of broken websites. Amaya is not > a relevant testing rendering engine. I don't even think it's a > relevant development tool since it's predominantly a WYSIWYG editor. > >> So, what's the concensus? Stick to CSS 2.1, or shoot for CSS 3? > > Well, I'm sure my vote is unsurprising: We should use the W3C > Recommendations as guidelines, but otherwise base our work on the most > efficient and widely-supported methods available. If all of the major > browsers support a given feature then that is ‘The Standard’. The W3C > writes Recommendations, not Standards. > > -Jason > -- Gerald Britton |
From: Rob H. <rob...@gm...> - 2009-05-01 23:20:20
|
Greetings: To completely sum up this overly lengthy conversation is to leave it alone!!! Sincerely Yours, Rob G. Healey On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 1:26 PM, Gerald Britton <ger...@gm...>wrote: > Good point re standards vs recommendations. If we're going for > widely-implemented, we can use css 3 as our reference, which as you > pointed out earlier can make life easier and css files smaller. > > On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 4:14 PM, Jason Simanek <jsi...@gm...> wrote: > > On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 9:11 AM, Gerald Britton <ger...@gm...> > wrote: > >> Apparently Amaya can't do pseudo-classes yet, though > >> Duncan didn't mention which version of Amaya he got the problem on. > > > > Amaya isn't a widely used browser. If anything it's a development tool > > that is also created/maintained by the W3C to promote its > > recommendations. Predictably, Amaya follows the recommendations very > > strictly. Just try loading a handful of your favorite sites in Amaya > > and see what you get. Probably a lot of broken websites. Amaya is not > > a relevant testing rendering engine. I don't even think it's a > > relevant development tool since it's predominantly a WYSIWYG editor. > > > >> So, what's the concensus? Stick to CSS 2.1, or shoot for CSS 3? > > > > Well, I'm sure my vote is unsurprising: We should use the W3C > > Recommendations as guidelines, but otherwise base our work on the most > > efficient and widely-supported methods available. If all of the major > > browsers support a given feature then that is ‘The Standard’. The W3C > > writes Recommendations, not Standards. > > > > -Jason > > > > > > -- > Gerald Britton > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Register Now & Save for Velocity, the Web Performance & Operations > Conference from O'Reilly Media. Velocity features a full day of > expert-led, hands-on workshops and two days of sessions from industry > leaders in dedicated Performance & Operations tracks. Use code vel09scf > and Save an extra 15% before 5/3. http://p.sf.net/sfu/velocityconf > _______________________________________________ > Gramps-devel mailing list > Gra...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel > |
From: Aaron R. S. <fuz...@ya...> - 2009-04-29 21:39:14
|
A quick google search brings up these. http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp http://www.w3counter.com/globalstats.php http://www.cvwdesign.com/txp/article/327/browser-statistics-and-internet-explorer-6-usage and http://css-tricks.com/why-people-still-use-ie-6/ for why yea ie6 still has a significant market share. I know I myself only got upgraded from windows 2000 to xp just a few months ago. which meant ie6 to ie7 but I work for a non profit. -- AaronS ________________________________ From: Rob Healey <rob...@gm...> To: Gramps Development List <gra...@li...> Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2009 11:50:17 AM Subject: [Gramps-devel] XML Declaration in XHTML Greetings: On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Gerald Britton <ger...@gm...> wrote: quirks mode? What a riot! those funny boys and girls at Microsoft strike again!! Seriously, though, it's dead easy to skip it with the new html library. Still, I'd rather be standards compliant rather than Microsoft compliant. And this is just IE6, you say? Probably we can forget it. What do others think? It isn't that I do not care, but I can't program to make everyone happy! If it were a mainstream browser, then I would say yes, but isn't any longer or is it??? I know that Internet Explorer is giant in the computing world, but is IE6? Sincerely, Rob On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 4:59 PM, Jason Simanek <jsi...@gm...> wrote: > Some new concern for including an XML declaration in our XHTML > documents. However, this only involves IE6, so who cares? Anyway, > thought you'd both like to know: > > Using an XML declaration triggers Quirks mode in IE 6 > http://www.456bereastreet.com/archive/200904/using_an_xml_declaration_triggers_quirks_mode_in_ie_6/ > -- Gerald Britton |
From: Jason S. <jsi...@gm...> - 2009-04-30 13:54:19
|
> On Wed, 2009-04-29 at 11:50 -0700, Rob Healey wrote: It isn't that I > do not care, but I can't program to make everyone happy! If it were a > mainstream browser, then I would say yes, but isn't any longer or is > it??? I know that Internet Explorer is giant in the computing world, > but is IE6? Unfortunately IE6 is about as 'mainstream' as it gets. The numbers vary, but IE6 can, depending on the site, still be more widely used than Firefox. IE7 can only be installed on Windows systems running Windows XP Service Pack 2 or higher. There are a lot of people running earlier versions of Windows and even more that run XP without any updates. However, Internet Explorer 7 use is starting to increase. You have to keep in mind that 'not mainstream' is any Linux user. ;D Now, I'm all for not bothering to correct small glitches that occur in IE6. But we should be monitoring our web output on IE6 and other browsers so that we know what the glitches are. There's been a lot of development growth in the web reports in the last 12 months. Because of that I think we need to go through a period of making our web output work as consistently as possible. Validating test output with the W3C validator is a great way to find some bugs, but in my experience valid XHTML and CSS is not necessarily a guarantee that the pages render as they should. I'm even starting to notice some big rendering problems in Firefox 2 that thankfully don't exist in Firefox 3. In my eagerness to use Firefox 3 I failed to test on FF2, which is probably still more widely used than FF3. Test, test and test again... I'm sure programmer's have a similar experience, but this is definitely the life of a web designer/developer. Have a great day, Jason Simanek |
From: Rob H. <rob...@gm...> - 2009-04-30 15:51:30
|
Dear Jason: On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 6:33 AM, Jason Simanek <jsi...@gm...> wrote: > > > On Wed, 2009-04-29 at 11:50 -0700, Rob Healey wrote: It isn't that I > > do not care, but I can't program to make everyone happy! If it were a > > mainstream browser, then I would say yes, but isn't any longer or is > > it??? I know that Internet Explorer is giant in the computing world, > > but is IE6? > > Unfortunately IE6 is about as 'mainstream' as it gets. The numbers vary, > but IE6 can, depending on the site, still be more widely used than > Firefox. IE7 can only be installed on Windows systems running Windows XP > Service Pack 2 or higher. There are a lot of people running earlier > versions of Windows and even more that run XP without any updates. > However, Internet Explorer 7 use is starting to increase. > > You have to keep in mind that 'not mainstream' is any Linux user. ;D > > Now, I'm all for not bothering to correct small glitches that occur in > IE6. But we should be monitoring our web output on IE6 and other > browsers so that we know what the glitches are. There's been a lot of > development growth in the web reports in the last 12 months. Because of > that I think we need to go through a period of making our web output > work as consistently as possible. Validating test output with the W3C > validator is a great way to find some bugs, but in my experience valid > XHTML and CSS is not necessarily a guarantee that the pages render as > they should. > > I'm even starting to notice some big rendering problems in Firefox 2 > that thankfully don't exist in Firefox 3. In my eagerness to use Firefox > 3 I failed to test on FF2, which is probably still more widely used than > FF3. > > Test, test and test again... I'm sure programmer's have a similar > experience, but this is definitely the life of a web designer/developer. > > Have a great day, Is it that much of an issue to have the <?xml ....> line in the output??? I guess it would truly depend upon what standards or line of validation that we choose to use? W3C shows it as a standard part of their template, but some browsers are slow in getting caught up with the W3C... So what should we do? It would be easy to remove it, but how fast will it be before the browsers get caught up? Should we downgrade a standard to please the browsers or should we leave it, and force the browsers to get on the ball? Sincerely, Rob > Jason Simanek > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Register Now & Save for Velocity, the Web Performance & Operations > Conference from O'Reilly Media. Velocity features a full day of > expert-led, hands-on workshops and two days of sessions from industry > leaders in dedicated Performance & Operations tracks. Use code vel09scf > and Save an extra 15% before 5/3. http://p.sf.net/sfu/velocityconf > _______________________________________________ > Gramps-devel mailing list > Gra...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel > |
From: Aaron R. S. <fuz...@ya...> - 2009-04-30 16:18:37
|
>Should we downgrade a standard to please the browsers or should we leave it, and force the browsers to get on the ball? It sucks but as much as developers would like the standard to be standard it's not. Users don't care what some dev thinks a standard is they only care on if it looks good now. if it doesn't it looks shoddy. While frustrating it's not usually too hard to code to the lowest common denominator. -- AaronS |
From: Stéphane C. <ste...@gm...> - 2009-04-30 20:01:08
|
> on if it looks good now. if it doesn't it looks shoddy. While frustrating > it's not usually too hard to code to the lowest common denominator. Lynx it is. I hear the latest version of Adobe's console-mode Flash plugin is now supported under linux. Stéphane |
From: Rob H. <rob...@gm...> - 2009-04-30 23:42:55
|
Greetings: As far as a text browser is concerned with a very heavy graphical display, I do not think it is possible to impress those people! Lynx would be a very hard one to impress with NarrativeWeb... I guess then it will be necessary to remove the <?xml .../> line? Gerald, do you want me to do so or do you want to??? Sincerely, Rob 2009/4/30 Stéphane Charette <ste...@gm...> > > on if it looks good now. if it doesn't it looks shoddy. While frustrating > > it's not usually too hard to code to the lowest common denominator. > > Lynx it is. I hear the latest version of Adobe's console-mode Flash > plugin is now supported under linux. > > Stéphane > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Register Now & Save for Velocity, the Web Performance & Operations > Conference from O'Reilly Media. Velocity features a full day of > expert-led, hands-on workshops and two days of sessions from industry > leaders in dedicated Performance & Operations tracks. Use code vel09scf > and Save an extra 15% before 5/3. http://p.sf.net/sfu/velocityconf > _______________________________________________ > Gramps-devel mailing list > Gra...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel > |
From: Aaron R. S. <fuz...@ya...> - 2009-05-01 00:28:16
|
lol well maybe not the "lowest" but at least ie 6 and greater, firefox, and now chrome. ________________________________ From: Stéphane Charette <ste...@gm...> To: Aaron R. Short <fuz...@ya...> Cc: Gramps Development List <gra...@li...> Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 1:00:58 PM Subject: Re: [Gramps-devel] XML Declaration in XHTML > on if it looks good now. if it doesn't it looks shoddy. While frustrating > it's not usually too hard to code to the lowest common denominator. Lynx it is. I hear the latest version of Adobe's console-mode Flash plugin is now supported under linux. Stéphane |
From: Duncan L. <dun...@gm...> - 2009-05-01 04:15:20
|
2009/5/1 Aaron R. Short <fuz...@ya...>: > lol well maybe not the "lowest" but at least ie 6 and greater, firefox, and > now chrome. Let's not forget Safari - which renders more compliantly than most, and can be installed on windows. Duncan |
From: Rob H. <rob...@gm...> - 2009-05-01 05:16:33
|
Greetings: On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 9:15 PM, Duncan Lithgow <dun...@gm...>wrote: > 2009/5/1 Aaron R. Short <fuz...@ya...>: > > lol well maybe not the "lowest" but at least ie 6 and greater, firefox, > and > > now chrome. > > Let's not forget Safari - which renders more compliantly than most, > and can be installed on windows. So I guess IE6 and above, firefox 3 and above, chrome, safari, and Opera ... is that the end of the list??? Will the WebCal and NarrativeWeb outputs be improved if we remove the <?xml ... /> statement from the top of the document? Does anybody out there have any experience with these browsers and the current output from NarrativeWeb, and WebCal, from trunk??? Please respond if you can help??? Sincerely Yours, Rob G. Healey > > > Duncan > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Register Now & Save for Velocity, the Web Performance & Operations > Conference from O'Reilly Media. Velocity features a full day of > expert-led, hands-on workshops and two days of sessions from industry > leaders in dedicated Performance & Operations tracks. Use code vel09scf > and Save an extra 15% before 5/3. http://p.sf.net/sfu/velocityconf > _______________________________________________ > Gramps-devel mailing list > Gra...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel > |