Having implemented some template support that will handle the use of
tables, I'm now "ready" (presuming some loss of sleep) to start
looking at CSS and learning how to replace tables with it. Before I
begin that effort (since there are lots of other things in the queue)
I'd just like to ask about browser compatability.

Has CSS been around long enough that all the more commonly used
browsers support it? Do they support it correctly? By moving from
the use of tables for layout to the use of CSS, would I be creating a
situation where my sites no longer display right in some common
browsers?

The thing about tables is that they're fairly simple (assuming your
clerical skills are off the chart) and support seems to be very solid
in all the common browsers.

tia.

--
http://www.ren-prod-inc.com/hug_soft...action=contact

hug wrote:
Do you think it might be possible for this conversation to have
occurred in the past? Do you think perhaps someone else may have
already asked this question before you? Or, Is the topic "css vs.
tables and browser compatibilty" one that you alone have thought of?

-Karl

"KarlCore" <karl@karlcore.com> wrote:

Do you think it might be possible that this is a usenet discussion
group and not some online database requiring full normalization? I
think that might be possible. I don't care what the situation was two
years ago. I'm interested in discussing the situation today. You
don't want to answer because you had that discussion before? Fine,
perfectly understandable, don't answer. You want to snap off a nasty
reply because you're a tightassed netnannie? LMAO, I don't need your
pissant stress, find some other way to off it.

--
http://www.ren-prod-inc.com/hug_soft...action=contact

Fleeing from the madness of the . jungle
hug <contact_info@sig_line.clickit> stumbled into news:alt.www.webmaster
and said:

play nicely children - Karl was merely suggesting you do a little research
- the subject covers a lot of ground and there is no single 'correct'
answer. Each site presents its own challenges. CSS is something one
needs to 'get' - when the penny drops, perspective is altered forever.

Irony and sarcasm are commonplace on usenet which is unfortunate as plain
text is not an ideal medium in such circumstances.

--
William Tasso

Save the drama
for your Mama.

hug wrote:
Both of the new discussions you began today are clearly representative
of a lazyassed person who didn't take the time to do their own research
and wants to come on usenet, ask your question and get a spoonfed
answer.

Merely getting off your ass and typing the subject of your post into
Google will give you a whole smathering of excellent *recent*
discussions people have already had on the subject.

-Karl

"hug" <contact_info@sig_line.clickit> wrote in message
news:tkkcs113svakmbrlirtpncq8v6lcq3kpp5@4ax.com...

I think he was just telling to to check them there archives as it's been
discussed in countless threads.

Here though, they tell you in subliminal ways.

You have to be a bit more thick skinned on UseNet.
I ask about coding and get back answers, help about wardrobe selections,
inquiries about the legitmacy of my birth and taunts regarding my lack of
cybersex abilities.
No biggie.




Allis

Fleeing from the madness of the jungle
Allis <allis@allis> stumbled into news:alt.www.webmaster
and said:

which reminds me - it's time for your next assessment <g>

--
William Tasso

Save the drama
for your Mama.

"William Tasso" <SpamBlocked@tbdata.com> wrote:

I tend to be a "play nicely" guy, but I do have a threshold beyond
which nice goes byebye and Mr Hyde takes the reins. <g>

I read Karl's post to say "you retard use google and don't bother us
important people". I've been using ng searches since way before
google bought dejanews, and I find them valuable... to a point.

I'll freely admit that I don't yet know enough about CSS to have a
good perspective on it. I'm saddled with memories of the period when
tad introduced styles to isil, I think that was around the 2.0 level
sometime around 1982, and it was living hell to deal with at that
point; I'll have to keep telling myself that CSS is the candy-coated
one that melts in your mouth, not the aspirin-tasting one that I
remember.

There are several characters of newsgroups that I've run into,
William. I've been playing with usenet since around '92 or so. There
is the ng that is full of active participants trying to help one
another succeed. There is the ng that is full of folks of all flavors
doing what they choose -- lacking any particular character at all, a
potpourri of posts and responses. There is the ng that is full of
folks who feel the ng is their territory to patrol, who take joy in
making snide insulting comments as they play alpha-male, who are
basically taking their stress out on whoever they think will take it.

I haven't figured out which, if any, aww fits into.

Exactly. <g>

--
http://www.ren-prod-inc.com/hug_soft...action=contact

"William Tasso" <SpamBlocked@tbdata.com> wrote in message
newsp.s29qyhztm9g4qz-wnt@tbdata.com...
You nailed that one straight on!

I'm like 2 weeks behind starting off the year..
I got a box sitting here next me with your stuff in it for RedBus, waiting
on disks supposed to be here last week.
With a todo list that starting to rival Santa's, and I can't seem to catch
up no matter how much coffee I drink.

Allis

"KarlCore" <karl@karlcore.com> wrote:

Or of people who are trying desperately to survive and are working
16-18 hour days and would like to hear CURRENT OPINIONS FROM PEOPLE
WHO KNOW rather than stale comments.

I'll put that on my list of when-there-is-time things to do.

You know Karl, obtaining information isn't the sole reason one would
post on a usenet discussion group. There is also the desire to find
out what kind of people are working in an area, learn who you can
trust as a potential business partner, build up relationships, and so
forth.

I've only been reading aww for a relatively brief period. I am slowly
building up an impression of who hangs out here. Currently it seems
like there are many "professional" webmasters... by that I mean people
who are paid employees of such-and-so whose job is to maintain the
company website. Not everyone is a paid employee of any company, some
are independents on their own. A few of us independents are just
starting up. It's a lot of work when there's no weekly paycheck. You
talk about lazy and getting off one's ass, well my normal workday
begins at 4-5am and ends around 10pm, during which time I have to run
3 businesses (including production, code development, and site
maintenance) and perform additional mechanical maintenance chores. It
is not a matter of lazy sitting on ass, it's a matter of hours in a
day. Having just dealt with the corporate taxes for the year, I feel
a bit of freedom from that concern and can get on to the other dozens
of issues to be dealt with.

Mea culpa, I am lazy. LOL. Thanks for your help Karl. LOL.

--
http://www.ren-prod-inc.com/hug_soft...action=contact