|
|
Posted by mr rudeforth on 04/15/07 00:13
"dorayme" <doraymeRidThis@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:doraymeRidThis-D6ECD8.09342315042007@news-vip.optusnet.com.au...
> In article <0bednaBi1JCwwbzbRVnyjwA@eclipse.net.uk>,
> "mr rudeforth" <mr@dot.spot> wrote:
>
> >
> > "Bergamot" <bergamot@visi.com> wrote in message
> > news:58d2i9F2g77s2U1@mid.individual.net...
> > > Jon Slaughter wrote:
> > > > "mr rudeforth" <mr@dot.spot> wrote in message
> > > > news:CJSdnTp7nZsNq7zbnZ2dnUVZ8tGqnZ2d@eclipse.net.uk...
> > > >>>
> > > >> http://browsershots.org/
> > > >
> > > > Awesome.
> > >
> > > Not really. It can only give a very general idea of how any particular
> > > browser will render a page. It does not tell you how it handles
> > > variations in text or window size, what happens with JavaScript (or
with
> > > it disabled) and a host of other variable browser settings.
> > >
> > > If you rely only on this service to test your pages, you'll be
> > disappointed.
> > >
> > i rely on it for layoutonly so it is fine.
> > oh and it can be configured how you wish in regards to javascript, etc
>
> You are not getting Bergamot's point. Layout is not something
> independent of the text size users use.
>
text size i can do for myself because i have opera (as my default browser)
as well as IE and firefox and netscape on my computer, browsershots i use
for linux and mac and other (combinations i havent thought of) things. so i
combine what i can do with what i cannot in order to get an idea of how
things are looking.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|