What is Digg?42 Comments
- dziban303, on 10/12/2007, -2/+18All these comments suck.
- trogdoor, on 10/12/2007, -4/+15Yes.
- scratched, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12Are you TRYING to be dugg down or are you being serious?
Standards exist for a reason. If you take the attitude that IE IS the standard then you're just further driving REAL standards to their grave. - brfitzp, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11I belive it's closer to 80 or 85%, and about 50-60% of them are just uninformed about firefox
- berzerk, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10especially that first one which has 3 diggs. when you 'digg' something, doesn't it already mean 'good find bro'?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8I don't even need 'hacks' anymore... sometimes rarely with a direct image placement, but I started using padding on those instead of margin (which FF IE and Opera calculate the same it seems).
And Jose, what are you a *****? Keep letting Frontpage allow you to think your a web developer when you're really not. A browser isn't a standard, its a medium to which interpret and view the internet. So far, only IE DOES NOT interpret XHTML/CSS in the same manner as JUST ABOUT EVERY OTHER BROWSER. Why? Because they ignore the standards set forth by W3C. So just shut the ***** up, you are wrong.
As for the chart, I think its overkill. I quit worrying about older browsers a while ago because you just get stressed out trying to cater to people with IE4 or NS4 when they really need to get with the program and at least bump up to a browser from 2002. I will make the site as compliant as far back as IE 5.5 and thats it.. trying to go further than that is a waste of development time and client money. - rick2k, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10he is right... average Joe doesn't even know what the ***** firefox is. Proberly just thinks us Internet junkies are on acid or something and making strange animals up.
- ElMoselYEE, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7in response to your second comment...no one is saying Firefox is the standard....STANDARDS are the standard...and every browser (save IE) makes a pretty good attempt at meeting those.
wow...i never thought I'd find a developer that preferred IE....i thought all web developers knew IE blew chunks at following standards. - keikun, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7if you're a web developer and don't know about this, then you've been living in a hole.
- echeese, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7You should check this out before using hacks:
http://www.webdevout.net/articles/css_hacks.php - NinJA999, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5@brfitzp...
there was a recent article in the Boston Globe that had the statistics...about 45% uses firefox (55% uses IE). Sure, thats not a majority, but its more than 5%! If you're a good web designer you design for ALL browsers - rick2k, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4with no net connection
- herkalees, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3@JoseGosdin for this comment "Let me clue you kids in. Firefox isn't the standard. It's Internet Explorer, 95% of the Internet uses it."
Know your stuff my friend, the number is currently about 85%, and while it is unarguably the most used browser, it is only because it comes preinstalled on most of the computers used around the world. That IS THE ONLY REASON WHY.
IE sucks. Code some real sites, for some large clients, and you'll see. - bradleyland, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Anyone under the impression that IE is the "standard", or that web standards don't matter, should first open their mind, then visit the following site:
http://webstandards.org/
Web standards is not about being "cool" or even about picking a "camp" to side with. It's about deciding that what we do is important, and that we should work together to ensure that content is accessible to people using a wide variety of platforms and browsers. Not everyone can afford a PC running Windows, and not everyone can view our content by reading it with their eyes.
Supporting web standards is the responsible, professional, and considerate thing to do. - herkalees, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3For the sake of IE vs. anything, do *not* use CSS hacks, they'll just screw you down the road. Use conditional comments instead: http://www.quirksmode.org/css/condcom.html
- rspeed, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2CSS HACKS ARE A VERY VERY VERY BAD IDEA!!!
Conditional comments are where it's at. - mvent2, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3PS, your first comment didn't make sense. This table just tells you whether the browser will apply the rules if the hacks are used. Mozilla is on par with the latest Opera in this table, which is a GOOD THING.
Maybe if you didn't develop messy code that doesn't comply with standards you wouldn't find Firefox such a pain to work with. - ElMoselYEE, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4as opposed to awesome, portable, maintable code that doesn't exist? people don't use hacks for the hell of it, you kno.
- mvent2, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Jose, Microsoft is a member of the W3C, the organization which devises the standards. So not only are they not supporting standards designed for ease in developing for all browsers, but they are not supporting their own organization.
PS Firefox was at 3%... when it was being developed. Internet Explorer is at less than 80% and dropping. - kasted, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4this will be great to share at work
- sinembarg0, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1A good rule of thumb: Everything on Digg relating to CSS that makes it to the front page has absolutely nothing to do with Counter Strike: Source, and everything to do with Cascading Style Sheets. I have never seen a Counter Strike: Source story on the front page.
- SenyWD, on 02/24/2009, -0/+0Download free standards compliant CSS layouts: http://www.free-css-layouts.com
- pickypg, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Why would a pro-CSS hacks site be useful to anyone?
Yes, it's nice to have some nice, attractive tricks work, but happens when anyone of those browsers (or all) fixes the problem?
It's not a good idea to depend on hacks to make your site work because if you do, then you need to watch your website with every browser (even ones that the hack seemingly does not affect) to ensure that it is working correctly. Call me crazy, but that's not how I want to spend my time, nor should anyone because it's a waste of time.
Obviously not all browsers work with every established standard even in CSS 2.0, but I'd rather have a little problem with the standards that with the hacks that are "supposed" to work, but one day will not. - albybum, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1"Statistics are important information. What you can read from the statistics below is that Internet Explorer 6 is the most common browser, XP is the most dominating operating system, and most users are using a display with 1024x768 pixels or more, with a color depth of at least 65K colors."
http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp
September 2006, Firefox was marked at about 27.3%
"(The statistics above are extracted from W3Schools' log-files, but we are also monitoring other sources around the Internet to assure the quality of these figures)" - terminalpariah, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Another way to feed CSS specifically to IE to exploit one of its bugs.
Standards-compliant browsers will only render CSS if the webserver attaches the MIMEtype text/css. IE will do its best with any file so long as you state type=text/css when you link to it.
So if you link to ieonly.txt as a stylesheet, it'll have the MIMEtype text/plain and be ignored by Firefox, Safari, Opera etc. But IE will pick it up.
Kinda more complicated than conditional comments... but I think it's neat. - Vipaar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I`m not professionally trained or employed as a developer, 18 months ago I started on my own project, vipaarworld.co.uk, I mainly use firefox for the everyday coding and then check my pages work properly in both IE6 and Opera 9.02 and if they don`t work properly in all 3 browsers, I "go back and do it again", I can`t see the need to use hacks, there should be 1 set of tags etc that work in all browsers and the browser vendors should make sure of this, if a site is inaccessible to a user of a particular browser, the advertisers on that site are having there "potential customers" limited instead of maximized, limited customers = limited profits, by coding for the 3 main windows browsers I`m "maximizing" my potential visitors, that "maximizes" the potential customers for my potential advertisers, and that is good for business.
- srosenblatt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Some of you fellow developers might be interested in reading about IE7's plans for standards. A shortened version on my blog:
http://www.stephrose.com/studio/?p=10
It mirrors a lot of what you guys are saying, I agree that we must program for standards and hope everyone owns up to it. I think IE might try. - nimit, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0In terms of IE7, this List is not very useful. It doesn't mention any hack for a rule that passes in IE7 but NOT in mozilla based browsers. For those of you who need a hack like that, use:
*:first-child+html .YOURSELECTOR {
}
This will work in IE7, but not in IE6 or Firefox. - ElMoselYEE, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1btw i hope no one hires these "developers" that don't even kno what standards are...
- djliquidice, on 10/12/2007, -7/+4good find bro.
- Urusai, on 10/12/2007, -7/+2Great idea, write some *****, non-portable, non-maintainable hacked code. Now ur a l33t h@x0r!!
- steelmaverick, on 10/12/2007, -16/+10LOSER
- PermuZero, on 10/12/2007, -10/+2...And with attitudes like that it always will be.
- unversed, on 10/12/2007, -8/+0Your comment sucks
- s000t, on 10/12/2007, -14/+3Not at all. Actually, that's why I clicked this link...so sad.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -14/+1@scratched:
"Real" standards like what? Firefox? Laughable.
Internet Explorer is used by over 95% of the Internet, Firefox is around 3%. Guess which is the real standard. - Clbck, on 10/12/2007, -21/+7Was I the only one who thought it meant "counter-strike: soruce" at first?
- steelmaverick, on 10/12/2007, -24/+5DIGG ME DOWN
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -25/+3Yeah, I'm a loser because I'm not a Firefox fanboy?
Let me clue you kids in. Firefox isn't the standard. It's Internet Explorer, 95% of the Internet uses it. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -29/+4I like how most of these are for working around Firefox. God, I hate developing for that browser.
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is