Magnus Manske magnus.manske@epost.de writes:
It is degined for decent browsers only ;-)
Then undesign it. Well written HTML degrades well.
Gareth Owen wrote:
It is degined for decent browsers only ;-)
Then undesign it. Well written HTML degrades well.
The HTML is well-written. The dynamic functions are just not supported by some (old) browsers. Without the dynamic functions, there's no sense in having this "pop-in" at all. So, old and incompatible browsers get the old RC page, decent browsers can have the new one.
But I bet you have another pseudo-smart reply to this as well.
Magnus
Magnus Manske wrote:
Then undesign it. Well written HTML degrades well.
The HTML is well-written. The dynamic functions are just not supported by some (old) browsers. Without the dynamic functions, there's no sense in having this "pop-in" at all. So, old and incompatible browsers get the old RC page, decent browsers can have the new one.
But I bet you have another pseudo-smart reply to this as well.
Now now, let's not get testy. :-) As long as we can accurately give people a page that works, everything is joyful.
--Jimbo
Gareth Owen wrote:
Magnus Manske magnus.manske@epost.de writes:
It is degined for decent browsers only ;-)
Then undesign it. Well written HTML degrades well.
I agree. We could do statistics from the site to see how many of each older browser, blah blah blah, but it's really better to just make sure we degrade gracefully for all browsers.
--Jimbo
On Wednesday 18 December 2002 06:52, Jimmy Wales wrote:
I agree. We could do statistics from the site to see how many of each older browser, blah blah blah, but it's really better to just make sure we degrade gracefully for all browsers.
It is possible in PHP to emit code that confuses a particular browser only if the browser is not that browser.
phma
Jimmy Wales wrote:
Gareth Owen wrote:
Magnus Manske magnus.manske@epost.de writes:
It is degined for decent browsers only ;-)
Then undesign it. Well written HTML degrades well.
I agree. We could do statistics from the site to see how many of each older browser, blah blah blah, but it's really better to just make sure we degrade gracefully for all browsers.
I think there's been a misunderstanding (actually not on my part, this one time;-)
I have no intention of *replacing* the Recent Changes page completely with my version. It uses JavaScript and dynamic HTML, which are not supported by many browsers, at least not to the extend that is required for that drop-down feature I am (and was) fully aware of that. That's why I plan to make it a user option, or a browser detection (as Pierre suggested), or a combination of both.
What got me a little enraged was the "work smarter, not harder"-type reply above (Dilbert readers will know what I mean;-). It implies that the same effect (drop-down, and maybe others to follow) could be achieved to work for all browsers. Gareth, if you know how to do that for a non-DHTML, non-JavaScript browser, without any plug-ins, you're very welcome to write it, and I'll implement it at once. Otherwise, I suggest you restrain yourself from wise-guy remarks.
I'm not sure why this bothers me so much. Maybe I'm overreacting. Then, maybe not.
Magnus
Magnus Manske wrote:
achieved to work for all browsers. Gareth, if you know how to do that for a non-DHTML, non-JavaScript browser, without any plug-ins, you're very welcome to write it, and I'll implement it at once. Otherwise, I suggest you restrain yourself from wise-guy remarks.
I didn't take him that way, but yeah, he was a little bit wise-guy in the way he put it.
I'm not sure why this bothers me so much. Maybe I'm overreacting. Then, maybe not.
Well, maybe, maybe not. But you're still the man in my book.
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org