| [reply] |
This is fine in principle, but maintain backwards compatibility. The use of CSS in a way which is not Netscape 4 compatible is not acceptable.
| [reply] |
Most of the basic stuff (like background colours, font-families, etc) is pretty well supported from my experience -- certainly all the current styling could be done with CSS to support NS4+, IE3+, Opera and Gecko based browsers.
Of course, once the classes are in there, if users want to override this and use some of the more obscure constructs to change the general appearance. It'd also mean that I could fix my current alignment problem :)
By the way, I believe the alignment issue to be due to IE6 inheriting styles from parent nodes correctly - a bug in previous versions meant it didn't do this -- either that or it's being dumb(er than normal)...
--
RatArsed
| [reply] |
Oh, and it'd make the site printer friendly with minor additions to the CSS (which non supporting browsers would just ignore) -- it's always nice for print friendly versions...
--
RatArsed
| [reply] |
While I agree entirely with your sentiments for code simplication, the introduction of classes would allow for much more flexibility in layout and consistently throughout styles and layout of the site, IMHO - Although I must admit I don't use CSS or class definitions in my HTML code either.
Although I don't think RatArsed was entirely clear about exactly what he wanted to achieve, I think that the nodes which I pointed out in my post should offer an acceptible alternative with the application of style sheets independent to the Perl Monks site - This I feel is an acceptable solution allow for HTML purity and stylised eye-candy :)
Cheers
Ooohhh, Rob no beer function well without! | [reply] |
