- From: Liam Quinn <liam@htmlhelp.com>
- Date: Sun, 08 Aug 1999 14:27:07 -0400
- To: "Kevin Berkheiser" <KBerk@Bigfoot.com>, "W3C Validator" <www-validator@w3.org>
At 01:48 PM 08/08/99 -0400, Kevin Berkheiser wrote: >Actually on this end I did not notice how Word 9 sent its html. Next >time I will send text only. Thanks. >I wanted to get the author's site to actually validate using the HTML 4 >Transitional DTD. > >I was hoping someone out there would know a way to do the same thing the >author was doing without CSS since that would break in Navigator 3. The >author is adamant about not breaking the site in 3.0 browsers. Navigator 3 doesn't support any of the margin or table background stuff you've done, so it seems that the site is already "broken" in Navigator 3--unless your page is still accessible (as any good page should be) without your specified margins and backgrounds. Just make sure that you're not depending on non-standard or poorly supported features like zero margins and table backgrounds. The page should still be readable without those features, even if it's not as beautiful. >It is too bad that HTML 4 validation eliminates the users ability to >give their page a consistent look since different browser >implementations have different default settings for things like margins. HTML 4.0 allows you to use style sheets to suggest margins. It's just that Netscape 4 is broken in this regard. >Thanks for looking at the errors though. Guess I am out of luck until >the 3.0 browsers become less common on the net. At what point should >web developers give up on outdated browsers? I wish more web developers >would just say, Opera 3.6 or a 4+ IE or Nav. It is impossible to >support new features if you must remain compatible with all old >browsers. No it isn't. Most new features (style sheets in particular) are designed to degrade gracefully in non-supporting browsers. If a browser doesn't support the feature, the page may not look as pretty, but the content should still be accessible. These days all the new pages I write are HTML 4.0 Strict with CSS1. I take some precautions (especially with the CSS) to avoid browser bugs (mostly IE3 and Nav4), but Netscape 3 has never been a problem since it doesn't try to support HTML 4.0 or CSS. The pages look somewhat bland on browsers like Netscape 3, but they're perfectly readable. I've never had a complaint from a Netscape 3 user. >CSS is so inconstant in the >existing browsers that it is basically worthless. Not quite. There are lots of workarounds out there; see <http://css.nu/> for some guidance. >Navigator 5 probably >won't enter beta till November and probably won't be released in >non-beta form until right after the first of the year. Once that >happens CSS will become more useful since at least most of CSS is >implemented in IE 4 and 5. There will still be problems unfortunately >since Navigator 5 will implement all of CSS 1 and of course IE only >implements the parts Microsoft wanted to implement. But at least it >will get rid of that crappy support in Navigator 4. Navigator 4's crappy support will always be there, and authors will have to consider it for a long time. Luckily, you can take advantage of a Nav4 bug to keep it from seeing complicated style sheets: <link rel=stylesheet href="crashNav4.css" media="screen, not Netscape4"> or <link rel=stylesheet href="crashNav4.css" media="screen, print, projection"> etc. Navigator 4 ignores any style sheet linked with a MEDIA value other than "screen". -- Liam Quinn
Received on Sunday, 8 August 1999 14:27:05 UTC