|
|
Posted by Chaddy2222 on 07/29/07 14:22
On Jul 29, 11:17 pm, Neredbojias <monstersquas...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Sun, 29 Jul 2007 09:32:22
> GMT Chaddy2222 scribed:
>
>
>
>
>
> >> > Hmmm well yes, I could see Hatters point as well. But until Flash
> >> > has a way of becomeing more accessible (by users with adaptive
> >> > technology) I probably won't be designing entire websites with it.
> >> > In a lot of cases good old HTML with some CSS for styleing works
> >> > fine and means you end up with a site with a consistent look and
> >> > feel, even if that "look" is not quite the same in all browsing
> >> > environments. The thing is though, even if the site does look the
> >> > same in all browsers (as in all visual browsers) through the use of
> >> > flash, then it still means that it won't work for those of us
> >> > useing aural browsers (so some kind of alternative still needs to
> >> > be provided. This means that you then need to update two sites
> >> > with the same content, which is why I like the CSS method, as you
> >> > can keep all the visual style seprat from the rest of the content
> >> > makeing it easier for SE bots and screen readers and visitors to
> >> > access the content. This also means that all visual
> >> > branding is kept in tact.
> >> > --
> >> > Regards Chad.http://freewebdesign.awardspace.biz
>
> >> Yes, you make many good points. I think the conclusion is that Flash
> >> has to be improved, as does html/css, etc. -And the browsers. It's
> >> just that sometimes I get a little sick of all the things that
> >> _don't_ work under "normal" html auspices. Yesterday I found a
> >> beauty of a bug in Firefox. Reload a page of thumbs and the first
> >> one disappears... Oh, I'm sure there are conditions. I think the
> >> thumb has to be bigger than a certain size, and perhaps centering
> >> plays a part, but it's definitely a bug - for something as simple as
> >> that. (Probably relates to the cache because it only happens
> >> online.) Geesh, will they ever get it right?
>
> > Hmmm, well images on the web are a tricky thing to get right, did you
> > miss setting a hight on one of those images by any chance? Cause that
> > is what it sounds like.
>
> No way, Jose. -Or in this case: Are you mad, Chad? The heights & widths
> are the same for all images and included via css. Markup and css validate,
> and there's nothing particularly unusual about the page. Here's one
> example of the general template:
>
> http://www.neredbojias.com/opa.html
>
> (Damn, reviewing the source, I see there _is_ some superfluous stuff, but
> believe me, those hs's have nothing to do with it. The basic 8-pic, fixed-
> top, cleared-content div layout does it. My only other example is adult
> material.)
>
> > But as to your question, no I don't think they ever will the web is
> > not like paper as they say (I mean it's just impossible to prodict
> > anything on the web. Having said that if you write valid code you will
> > have a better chance of items working the way you want and I am really
> > starting to not be as concerned with IE as a result of this
> > (especially as FireFox Opera and all of those type browsers running
> > gecho display stuff in a very similar way.
>
> My code is valid - even when it's not. <grin>
>
> Actually, my markup _is_ valid. I don't believe I have any pages left with
> exceptions.
>
Hmmm yeah, it does seam your code is fine. I reckon it must be just a
rendering bug.
--
Regards Chad. http://freewebdesign.awardspace.biz
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|