Web Design Forums

smallbeer · 07-04-2003, 13:35

An interesting, if not obvious for some, read from evolt.org...

http://www.evolt.org/article/Forward_compatibility_and_web_standards/17/60115/index.html

I hear all the time these days people waxing lyrical because their code is validating when at the same time they pay little attention to the actual structure of the page.

Like he says, there's a host of other issues to address if you want to be truly forward compatable.

I'll leave my 2p at the door.

J.

Ro · 08-04-2003, 16:40

It was an interesting little piece, SB. Coming from my own perspective of course, I never really lost any sleep in respects to making sure my code was 'standard'. I'm not that smart so I just kept it simple. When doing client work, do I hit the demographic i.e. will people with such and such browers be able to see it, interact with it etc. With personal work, I really don't give a damn. I think there is a place for standards, but I also believe this falls under the proverbial 'good design' schtick that we all use at one time or another. Good design extends from imagery to coding structures as well. Ha, or maybe it's just me.

smallbeer · 09-04-2003, 06:39

There's something about *well structuredness* (?) that's making me quite obsessed.

It's maybe that I always thought I'd go into a more technical drawing area rather than the creative side.

As a student I'm also finding the standards a good opponent to pit my skills against (for want of a better description). I haven't come against a design I really like which has made me drop them yet.

I am using more and more css hacks these days which seem to be antithetical to the spirit of the W3C's recommendations. Some which often make me think, "Is this any better than spacer.gifs!?"

Hopefully that will change though when more browsers are upgraded.

Stickman · 09-04-2003, 11:09

I think well structuredness is a great base to start with.

Standards shouldn't restrict your design, but hacks are the best way of filling any gaps when it does. They are there to help you overcome the gayness of browsers and should be needed less and less in the future. Spacer gifs are more about papering over the gaps in a lame design.

Fwiw, I think you're going about things the right way and the EIMC page proved this.

07-04-2003, 13:35	#1 (permalink)
smallbeer I Ain't Losing Any Sleep™ Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 5,236	Forward compatibility and web standards An interesting, if not obvious for some, read from evolt.org... http://www.evolt.org/article/Forward_compatibility_and_web_standards/17/60115/index.html I hear all the time these days people waxing lyrical because their code is validating when at the same time they pay little attention to the actual structure of the page. Like he says, there's a host of other issues to address if you want to be truly forward compatable. I'll leave my 2p at the door. J. __________________ That's fuckin' ingenious, if I understand it correctly. It's a Swiss fuckin' watch.

08-04-2003, 16:40	#2 (permalink)
Ro The Crooked Grin Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 31	Hmmm It was an interesting little piece, SB. Coming from my own perspective of course, I never really lost any sleep in respects to making sure my code was 'standard'. I'm not that smart so I just kept it simple. When doing client work, do I hit the demographic i.e. will people with such and such browers be able to see it, interact with it etc. With personal work, I really don't give a damn. I think there is a place for standards, but I also believe this falls under the proverbial 'good design' schtick that we all use at one time or another. Good design extends from imagery to coding structures as well. Ha, or maybe it's just me.

09-04-2003, 06:39	#3 (permalink)
smallbeer I Ain't Losing Any Sleep™ Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 5,236	There's something about well structuredness (?) that's making me quite obsessed. It's maybe that I always thought I'd go into a more technical drawing area rather than the creative side. As a student I'm also finding the standards a good opponent to pit my skills against (for want of a better description). I haven't come against a design I really like which has made me drop them yet. I am using more and more css hacks these days which seem to be antithetical to the spirit of the W3C's recommendations. Some which often make me think, "Is this any better than spacer.gifs!?" Hopefully that will change though when more browsers are upgraded. __________________ That's fuckin' ingenious, if I understand it correctly. It's a Swiss fuckin' watch.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

09-04-2003, 11:09	#4 (permalink)
Stickman Dr. Lucien Sanchez Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: UK Posts: 5,625	I think well structuredness is a great base to start with. Standards shouldn't restrict your design, but hacks are the best way of filling any gaps when it does. They are there to help you overcome the gayness of browsers and should be needed less and less in the future. Spacer gifs are more about papering over the gaps in a lame design. Fwiw, I think you're going about things the right way and the EIMC page proved this.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)