W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 2008

Re: @media and browsers conditional statments

From: Brad Kemper <brkemper.comcast@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2008 07:37:22 -0700
Cc: CSS 3 W3C Group <www-style@w3.org>
Message-Id: <0EC99F25-AA44-444D-8BDC-A538AD2F2E5D@gmail.com>
To: David Woolley <forums@david-woolley.me.uk>


On Aug 11, 2008, at 12:29 AM, David Woolley wrote:

> but there are still a lot of new inexperienced people, and a lot  
> whose training is limited to glossy cook books and looking at other  
> people's solutions.

What do you have against glossy books? Why should the paper stock it  
is printed on make a difference? Is saying "glossy" supposed to  
illicit some sort of prejudice against anything they contain?

Those who write how-to books are often quite knowledgeable about what  
they write, and I would expect them to read the spec. Those who look  
at other people's solutions would follow a chain of people starting at  
someone who read the spec. Most examples would show that the browser  
sniffing would only be used in limited circumstances.

Those who are bad at following good examples and choose to design  
their pages in an idiotic way will end end with idiotically designed  
pages. So what? They will end up with idiotically designed pages no  
matter what any of us do.
Received on Monday, 11 August 2008 14:38:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:55:11 GMT