«

[Japo]

Originally Posted by PET

I'm using Maxthon and I still have IE6.

I don't really know. It could be that the site used CSS features supported by IE7 but not IE6. There has to be someone else with IE6 who can say if it works for him.

[dosraider]

Originally Posted by Japofran

I...There has to be someone else with IE6 who can say if it works for him.

Ok ok ok, fired up my ol'W98SE PC ..IE6 says :
Version IE6.0.2800.1106 SP1 , and everythings works fine.

But the avatars in the forum are looking kinda weird, as in a small window :cheesy:

[Edit]
Hey no, I can't edit my posts even if I log in in IE6, or it must be that I can't simultanous be logged in in IE6 on my old one and in FF on my home PC..... TEST 1.2.3....


[Edit]²
Nope, no edit button in IE6. :weird:

[_r.u.s.s.]

i think it has no point talking about differences in different browsers, this site needs some real modifications

w3c validators:

html invalid, 434 errors
css invalid, 26 errors

[dosraider]

Tss tss tss, nag nag nag, small details ... small details.


hmmmm,
html invalid, 434 errors ? Someone didn't try run this thoroughly, apparently.
Of course such things aren't uncommon, even if 434 is a pretty high number.
Seen worse.

[Japo]

ROFL didn't know IE6 worked in Win98. Anyone with IE6 on a post-diluvian OS?

Pet do you have XP or Vista or what?

Originally Posted by dosraider

Nope, no edit button in IE6. :weird:

Thanks for not solving the problem and bringing a fresh one.

Originally Posted by _r.u.s.s.

i think it has no point talking about differences in different browsers, this site needs some real modifications

This one and 99 per cent of the WWW. Sad and annoying. Specially since this one was made by proffesionals who got paid and all (Studentis employees). I noticed that since the beta site but I don't think they'll ever care about W3C standards. Who cares about standards, just don't use anything but IE or FF and you'll be fine. Except when you're not. (DUMB.)

Originally Posted by dosraider

Seen worse.

Me too. But that's just the front page.

Anyway there are many CSS 2 features that IE7 doesn't support compared to other browsers. It's supposed to be addressed with IE8. Can't tell if IE6 supported even many less, since the problem is that not enough work was made in that field from 6 to 7.

EDIT: There's also edit button in IE7.

[_r.u.s.s.]

Who cares about standards, just don't use anything but IE or FF and you'll be fine. Who cares about standards, just don't use anything but IE or FF and you'll be fine.

i'm not even going to start arguing about this sentence, i'll just say that it was very retarded

[dosraider]

Originally Posted by Japofran

..... Specially since this one was made by proffesionals who got paid and all (Studentis employees).

I think that's a bit the problem, aslong you have peeps working for free or from a feeling of involvement, or personal interesse, you can spend all the time you need to bugrun.

Things change when you must pay them, time is money, you only will invest time/money if it's absolutely needed in a site as Abandonia.
Economics instead of love for ol'games.....

[Japo]

Originally Posted by dosraider

I think that's a bit the problem, aslong you have peeps working for free or from a feeling of involvement, or personal interesse, you can spend all the time you need to bugrun.

Things change when you must pay them, time is money, you only will invest time/money if it's absolutely needed in a site as Abandonia.
Economics instead of love for ol'games.....

But you're assuming that they know about standards and they don't want to implement them. Perhaps they know that they exist and no better. They just code their crap and try it in IE or FF or if you're lucky both until it fits. When they have to debug there may be different bugs for each browser, and the workarounds they use for fixing are specific to the quirks and non-standard features supported by each one.

If they followed standards they would have to validate in w3.org only, which gives debugging info instead of when debugging is done by trial and error and the thing just doesn't work. Also standard code is cleaner and more maintainable. The resulting layout should be more or less the same in all standards-compliant browsers. And at the same time browsers would be encouraged to fully support standards and to stop offering particular non-standard features.

The problem is that the human resources people who hire web developers of course know even less about standards, so they don't value it in the curricula, and they won't value more a guy who codes standard than a guy who codes garbage, as they should. (But some day, web standards will turn into a hype just like object-oriented programming, they'll all be fired LOL.)

[_r.u.s.s.]

man, i don't know where you live but human resources people who hire web devs are usually from a web dev company.. and they know standarts. every semi decent, even crappy web developer companies follow standarts, every trained web developer knows the standarts. it's a basic for web dev business. and all the browsers should too. this is why is IE so much retarded (also this). and standarts are very important for browser developers too. people who say that standarts are nothing important, or omissible, are amateurs and apparently don't understand the matter

it's like writing a book in improper grammar or trying to draw "modern art" when you don't understand art at all

of course that home users and amateur html fanatics probably won't care about standarts but it's understandable since it's just their hobby. there are gazzilions of fanfiction and amateur writers with improper grammar and styling as well

also sorry that i write standarts instead of standards but i have just realized it and i feel to lazy to fix that. stan darts lol

[Mighty Midget]

Just a heads-up. It seems I'm a translator now, or so it says in my profile. Can someone fix that? Thanks.