Printable View
I didnt want to jump into this but, i think that is a rather silly thing to say. If the www had depended solely on perfect code for a browser to view the page then designers would write perfect code, simple as... they do it for most other programming languages...Quote:
Originally Posted by iaskwhy
I don't know if i would say that, there is alot of crappy code out there, sure it works... but I would say it is far from perfect.Quote:
Originally Posted by random10122
Your missing my point. The www did not get to be what it is today because a few, very few people were able to write good code. It got this way; huge, like a snowball rolling down hill, first devouring small villages, then whole continents, because WYSIWYG editors such as Netscape Composer, FrontPage and other cheapo html editors were available to every Tom, Dick and Harry that wanted to try his hand at web design.
Without them, the internet would have floundered and died.
what about flash? flash is the most popular multimedia format in the world and it requirers perfect code to work. Another point to note is that perfect code is a lot easier to learn than sloppy code. If you can change the way you do things and they do different things then that is confusing. Now you have to learn that <br>, <BR> and <br /> all do the same thing and that your website wont work on all browsers. If the web was strict from the begining it would have been a lot easier.
bad code is how people found things... by sheer accident, I found a way to "scale" images from 1 pixel to their correct size way back during the Netscape 3.3 Gold days... my site would initially take a longer time to load because it was also loading the secondary images too, but once they were all loaded... poof. The site was incredibly fast.
But bad code and the internet... the standards for the www weren't really necessary, nor enforceable until recently. If it had started out strict, then 90% of the stuff out now wouldn't even be able to parse bad code, 90% of the sites wouldn't exist because you'd have just a few people able to make a perfectly good/strictly perfect written web page, and the growth of the www would have been choked out from the beginning.
The standards that are here now are due mainly to experimentation, expansion... and bad code.
Talk about bad code, and nobody mentioned Microsoft!? They write some of the crappiest programs known to mankind... but they "work"... and that's all a consumer needs... for it to work. That's all.
This is just what I've been trying to point out. Not 90% of websites out there, it's really more like 98% of all websites are build by WYSIWYG editors. Nobody learns code now, never did.Quote:
Another point to note is that perfect code is a lot easier to learn than sloppy code.
Still, all those people who want to build a website, and do, aren't listening to rule makers, they continue to use their editors.
That confuses me. Why dont the WYSIWYG's make propper code?
I've used FP since 1998. I never learned code, except what I picked up on my own. So I don't really know. Maybe because the rules keep changing?
I just started using Dreamweaver, and it makes as many or more mistakes as FP ever did. Now I got to learn more code. LOL
But I'm getting away from plain html, I'm going to learn CSS which seems to be a lot better and easier to learn.
I just got here and not read all the thread, just a few first posts and last few posts, so comment below based only on what i read so far :p
The reason why DW makes so many mistakes is often coz people try to use it to design sites in, its the adding and removing of code via WYSISYG interface that screws things up, if the site was designed properly with a design tool like PS, and introduced into DW in a planned and concise way without hit and miss trial on error judgement calls, then the code will rarely get messed up, I can 95% of the time validate my pages first time from DW, only on odd occasions i get validation errors, and when i do its usually coz the DW editor has screwed up a table (yes i still use tables sometimes, not all clients pay enough for CSS headaches :p ) or missed an alt tag. Not rocket science to fix :rolleyes:
So you can't blame the tools, it's the user, people are too lazy or unskilled in the tools they use, thats what makes bad code.
I use FF and i rarely get a problem, in fact i think since i started using it (0.9) i can only think of 1 site that i couldn't visit and they have now changed that recently due to requests by FF users (UK Bank).
I did hear rumours about a year ago that Ciscos was introducing stricter authentication on code passing through there networks in the near future, all code would have to validate to the latest W3C standards, and seeing that Ciscos has a major part of the network that creates the internet, this could be interesting if true.
that's the beauty of it, and that's why there are so many "webdesigners" around. You can't go study medicine by yourself, and say "ok, now i'm gonna go operate some patients, it doesn't matter if i don't know where the liver is, the nurse will tell me what i have to take out, or there are machines that know". But with web design...you can read a couple of tutorials, learn to work with a program without knowing what it does, be bad at what you do, and still get work and start calling yourself a webdesigner. Ain't it beautifull?
That's just priceless.... sorry to go off topic again.Quote:
Originally Posted by iaskwhy
Wow, the fanboyism in this thread is off the scale! :yikes:
I'm not even saying that perfect code is needed... especially with all of the wysiwyg editors out there (*shudder*). However, if we keep becoming more and more leniant then soon it will be impossible to do anything with one browser, coding will become a nightmare, etc. I'm not saying we should switch to browsers that only parse *perfect* code right now, but we definetly need to move toward a more strict markup.
Sure, it will be hard, but thats growing pains for ya...
FIREFOX FIREFOX FIREFOX OHH OHH OHH! :)Quote:
Originally Posted by gesteves
Apparently Target doesn't care about FireFox either.
not that it matters that much to me.... *opens in IE window
whats the problem with target
*leaves site and marks as "crap site, do not come back"
then how come it opens in my firefox browser?Quote:
Originally Posted by admedia
Check the menus...Quote:
Originally Posted by mark_my_words
But lhoss is right, for every site like target, there's gonna be another hundred that sell all the same gear, so move on, and find one that works. Far simpler than switching back to IE, and when target see how many FF visitors are dashing off after seeing the first page, they'll fix it.
uhhhh...right
In reference to the Target thing, why the hell does FF have issues with flash. That's the main thing there, the menus are dropping behind the swf. Also FF has issues with some of the embedding options for flash movies (scaling centering crap).
My 2 cents about the debate as if you all care...I am far more an artist than a coder and the fact that IE provides an 'error buffer' (not that I ever screw up) is not a bad thing. I run both on my P4HT 3.2 and a gig of ram and neither performs significantly better than the other. I think they are both viable options and standards need to be met somewhere in the middle.
The real point is!!!!!Why are we fighting amongst ourselves when we really should turn our attention to crushing those eccentric, rich, trust fund baby, "I wanna be different" bastards that use macs and really muck everything up!!!
where the hell did that come from? why are you callin apple users that! what does that have todo anything with firefox?Quote:
Originally Posted by JWin