mozilla firefox CSS coverage ??

*Johannes Koch* <koch (AT) w3development (DOT) de>:

Christian G. wrote:

FF renders the table with source code improperly.

The source code is in a pre element, which is inside a div. No table.

Well, actually another use-case for 'pre-wrap'.

--
"Right way turning, Listen we are learning.
Head's full of noise, Chicken's got no choice.
Heads are rollin', Chicken blood is stolen.
The rest of the chicken wants a picke-nicken" Guano Apes - We use the Pain

On Wed, 1 Dec 2004 14:17:48 +0100, "Christian G."
<dont'replay (AT) anywhere (DOT) geo> wrote:

It would be interesting to learn where you have found CSS "standards"
with version numbers 0.8 and 1.45 ?
means... no standards. </cynism

Not that easy to get, given the rest of your input.

Requesting http://validator.w3c.org -verbose (any websites) -- a
misplaced design is shown: shame.
I don't understand what you mean by that ?

Try validating a page with option "Show Source".
FF renders the table with source code improperly.

Well, it's not a table based presentation of course and if an
overflowing PRE in DIV presentation bothers you, by all means go on to
make your view port a bit wider. It's not always an "error in reception"
you know.

Try this one, it might be easier for you to handle ;-)

http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=ht...ss=1&verbose=1

Table rendering is an absolute basic.

For tabular data yes; for layout? Please expand your knowledge base.

IMHO thats a shame.

You are entitled to your opinion of course.

Have the guys from FF dev team checked their own product
against a page known as valid?

I'm pretty sure they have, more often than required even.

[...]

Since NS 4 i'm waiting for a product meets w3c standards.

Yea, and I want to jump around on the surface of the moon before I put
my nose in the air for good. We might be looking at the same time frame
for these two events.

Still it's not fair for any one to "grumble" about a development work
that has involved so many unpaid volunteers around the world and
eventually produced a whole slew of freely available products that all
of them have the best capacity today, and potential to become even more
in the future.

The correct response should have been to join the development team,
check in some new code that solves just your problem, let it be
evaluated for quality and further inclusion in distribution.

If you don't want to join in, fine, but accept what you get from those
who are there then. It will still be the best compromise there is.

Cross browser compatibility takes a lot of time and money.

Agreed; but it would be far fetched to blame the crowd of developers
around Gecko for that. The real ballast of the www is held by Microsoft.

Not all of my clients understand this and are willing to pay for it.

Give them an NS4x compliant table setup then, by some reason most of
that shit still "works" to some acceptable level in today's browsers
too.

If your clients money is what you want first hand, forget about client
education and go on to set up that "glossy brochure" that makes him
happy.

And i don't want to support IE only.

You don't have to. The Gecko base of browsers are sometimes better on
"IE bug compatibility" than IE itself.

[...]

We could already design on a different level.

Hmm, the www is about making information available and fully accessible
first of all, a nice presentation is an optional, but not required,
bonus.

Most people don't understand that but do expect the www to be just
another TV-ad setup. Who shall we blame for that part of misleading?

--
Rex

In article
<erfpq0t3h4ds4vbhun5su9nuelpd2imgt4 (AT) news (DOT) spartanicus.utvinternet.ie>,
Spartanicus <me (AT) privacy (DOT) net> wrote:

The Mozillians seem to be more interested in adding -moz proprietary css
extensions.

Lately, the -moz-* properties have been experimental implementations of
CSS3 properties. Experimenting without the vendor prefix would poison
the Web for CSS3.

--
Henri Sivonen
hsivonen (AT) iki (DOT) fi
http://iki.fi/hsivonen/
Mozilla Web Author FAQ: http://mozilla.org/docs/web-developer/faq.html