coComments related to folletto

Sure. Let's re-add physical de

2007-01-27T22:14:00.551+01:00

Sure. Let's re-add physical desktop chaos to a DIFFERENT tool, already with its own order. Great study, but I don't think that's the right direction. :|

Curiosavo qui dopo qualche tem

2007-01-25T00:41:33.457+01:00

Curiosavo qui dopo qualche tempo. Ti dissi in effetti che un analista non era Apple. E quindi di aspettare. Purtroppo abbiamo avuto conferma di questa situazione, che mette giustamente in dubbio molte cose. La tua ipotesi è interessante, però riflettendoci, sarebbe davvero miope per Apple anche in quel contesto: il DRM sta crollando. Lentamente, ma sta crollando. Quindi, do per buona la tua tesi che mi sembra la più valida sin'ora e aggiungo che credo che per me non potranno giocarci a lungo su questa cosa. L'altra cosa che li potrà fare cedere è quando altri "phone" (perché per me non è un telefono) competeranno su interfaccia e feature e quindi non rimarranno altre vie. Che soddisfazione le frecciatine ai fanboy eh? :D

Spendida idea ;)

2007-01-24T16:14:18.028+01:00

Spendida idea ;)

Exceptional. :D

2007-01-15T20:54:58.615+01:00

Exceptional. :D

@ Ben Ryan: "Actually, the * html hack has it’s days numbered now that IE7 will parse that filter in certain modes." Yes, numbered, but still more than years away, when IE6- dev could be ignored (ever? sic). "Conditional filters don’t have to have CSS added to every page - you can use them to link to external CSS files just as you do with the link tag. The reasons you’ve listed for hating conditionals are either incorrect or can be bypassed with a little effort." I was thinking right at the solution you just cited: if I have to add a nonsemantic, proprietary, in-comment item to an (X)HTML, I prefer to add a non-proprietary one NEAR the point that need fixing, instead of on another stylesheet (+1 file, +1 line, proprietary, too far from the CSS to fix, etc). In the end, one could use the solution he/she prefers, but still, there are more usability and mantainability issues using a nonsemantic in-comment instruction. One could agree with MS (lte/eq) or not (star-like hacks), but still we have to face this: we have to handle another conditional.

I've been contacted by just a

2006-10-28T13:51:49.552+02:00

I've been contacted by just a few clients, at the moment. In my CSS I used *only* the star hack (* html selector). This is a 100% CSS compliant selector AND works well. I use it redefining specific rules under IE6-. It's clear that IF Internet Explorer 7 fixed the star hack "bug" AND at the same time it was standards compliant, nothing should be changed in my CSSes. But IE7 isn't standards compliant, so some pages broke. At this time I'm using another CSS standard selector bug, that targets JUST IE7. I've described it on my Intense Minimalism blog. It's in italian, but the links and the general sense using babelfish should be clear. I HATE conditional comments. This is because: * It's a nonstandard feature. * It "scripts" in the comments. Semantics bye bye. * It's splitted from the style that need correction. Correct one and you don't know if IE should be edited as well or not (@import "" all also has this problem). * It must be placed on every page (even if this isn't a real issue using a template engine, it means that the "style" knowledge must be splitted. * It's exactly the same of using the star hack (LT 7): it doesn't match for the specific feature but for the browser, exactly like the IE conditionals. * It's exactly the same of using the star first-child hack (EQ 7).