At 08:49 PM 11/7/2005, Bruce wrote:
>that utilise standard DOMs.
This is a great little reference and philosophy book about using good
coding practices on modern browsers. He makes no apologies, and with
a few minor exceptions, uses none of the traditional hacks that have
examples of solving common problems, including scripts to allow
validation on both the client and server side with a common code base.
experience is that about 95% of most audiences can deal with itm
based on the browser types appearing in my server logs, and the fact
that most users *never* change their default browser settings. There
are situations where those other 5% are critical, and also
specialized environments, like corporations that demand a specific
non-compliant browser type.
to modern DOM, works just fine. As a user, I much prefer an initial
client-side validation when filling out forms, even just a rough one
to check for the most common mistakes. I've also found that the
developer extensions for Firefox makes testing and debugging
I've followed this thread with mild amusement; there are compelling
arguments for both sides, and I think using one's good judgement for
a particular situation is the answer. The level of passion is taking
on religious overtones, and as with religion, I would hate to have to
say which side is always the "right" one. Please relax!
When replying, please *trim your post* as much as possible.
*Plain text, please; NO Attachments
Searchable Archive at http://www.info-arch.org/lists/sigia-l/
IA 06 Summit. Mark your calendar. March 23-27, Vancouver, BC
Sigia-l mailing list -- post to: Sigia-l_at_asis.org
Changes to subscription: http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigia-l
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6
: Tue Nov 08 2005 - 11:43:19 EST