Posted by dorayme on 04/11/06 00:50

In article <Xns97A19213950B0castleamber@130.133.1.4>,
John Bokma <john@castleamber.com> wrote:

> If it's an IE only issue (make sure that it really is) then you don't use
> hacks, you use "conditional comments":
>
> <http://virtuelvis.com/archives/2004/02/css-ie-only>
>
> Hacks are ugly.

Well, maybe it is a matter of taste... on reflection, are hacks
per se ugly, and does it matter? What matters objectively is that
something relatively simple works, that it is not going to be a
nuisance later. This latter possibility is a serious one.

Ugly is in the eye of the beholder on this one, I don't find them
that ugly, they have been cleverly found and work and I am
reminded of this when I see them and I look on admiringly. They
are simpler in many ways than making separate style sheets just
for this IE or that IE and IE in common.

I am not advocating them here. I just think it is a bit precious
to refrain from fighting something ugly (IE rendering standards)
in too prim and proper a manner. There is an argument here that
the remedy rather nicely fits the cause.

And really, when push comes to shove, they are broadly
conditional defences against specific nuisances.

--
dorayme

[Back to original message]