Sl@y3D for my n@me Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 Chosing <strong> instead of <b> as a standrad is insane for the very reason that it takes 5 characters to type more, 10 with the closing tag. Sorry, but I don't like that.What you're saying here is quite logical. I'm not overly sure why the W3C would choose a longer tag. Perhaps there is a reason though.However, your next statement is horribly inaccurate.And again I reiterate that "I'm positive that a website will look fine on IE6 even if never tested on this browser." And I'm right as demonstrated by BenoitRen's example above.This statement goes against the experiences of millions of web developers across the world. I know of people who would go about for hours in order to fix their site to work in IE6, and these hacks would then go and cause another browser to break, although they all worked perfectly before the hacks were implemented. These aren't complex, massive websites I'm talking about. The designs were, by and large, simple. they just wouldn't render right in that one particular browser. Hell, the majority of phpBB themes seem to break IE6 support, complex or otherwise. The rest use hacks.The majority of sites work in IE6, yes. Why is that? Because most of them were designed with IE6 in mind. They still are, it's one of the most popular browsers in the world. Imagine all that time lost to make it so, having to work around the lack of PNG transparency, the lack of native SVG support which means that sites cannot use one resizeable graphic in the place of lots of jpgs. Transparency is a big deal, because it tends to make sites look far more elegant and easy to customise. Its use is now becoming widespread.You seem to not notice that the web is moving in a different direction to what you may wish it was. While some people may be happy to use tables, bold tags and all that old stuff, perhaps for backwards compatibility or simplicity, the big sites and people with ambition want to squeeze more out of that web browser. Embedded videos, embedded audio, shadows, transparency, SVG support, a ton of CSS options and so many ways to manipulate that text, interact with that content and guide you through that page. The web is becoming focussed on interactivity. IE6 holds back the web with its broken rendering and lack of features. Then again, IE 5.01 SP4 (as included in Windows 2000 SP4) is still supported, so should we be building websites for that? God no.I can't stress enough how small sites with home pages and simple navigation, without database functionality or any fancy stuff, are so very outdated. They're going away already. IE6 is fine for that. It's not fine for anything bigger, because IE6 was a 2001 product, and this is 2009.Please, PLEASE don't tell people that any site works in IE6. They're built to accommodate it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!Register a new account
Already have an account? Sign in here.Sign In Now