Float-less layout, compatible with more than 12 browsers.. awesome!
This is a really cool technique I stumbled upon a couple of weeks ago.
So, I thought you might like it.
http://www.tjkdesign.com/articles/float-less_css_layouts.asp
This layout is compatible over all browsers, including IE 5.5+ and 3 platforms - windows, mac and mobile browsers.
Kinda hard to employ, but well worth it.
It also reminds me of an article I read back then.
"10 second web site usability test"
"In firefox go to View -> Page style -> No Style.
To have good usability, your page should appear with the title of your article first and below it - navigation and footer.
The context of the markup must be preserved and there should be no images, unless those related to the content of the current page."
Just check out the link above and go to the example page. I have not seen approach to coding a design employing a better semantics and accessability.
Have fun with it.
webwiz posted this at 00:47 — 6th January 2010.
He has: 629 posts
Joined: May 2007
We abused tables for years to get layouts to work cross-browser, so I suppose it's okay to abuse lists now.</sarcasm>
You may like to take a look at Layout Gala - a collection of 40 different layouts using a single, simple, semantic HTML markup. Much easier and more versatile, in my opinion...
Cordially, David
--
delete from internet where user_agent="MSIE" and version < 8;
yMladenov posted this at 06:00 — 6th January 2010.
He has: 33 posts
Joined: Dec 2009
Hehe. Yeah, it is total lists abuse.
That is a good link you posted, I will keep it for further reference. Thanks.
So far I am sticking with floats, by the way..
Megan posted this at 17:50 — 6th January 2010.
She has: 11,421 posts
Joined: Jun 1999
Yeah, I've seen that list idea before but it clearly is an abuse of lists. Sometimes people tend to over think the semantics and try to apply some when there just aren't any. That's why they've come up with some new tags for HTML5 (header, footer, section etc.)
Megan
Connect with us on Facebook!
yMladenov posted this at 17:08 — 7th January 2010.
He has: 33 posts
Joined: Dec 2009
Actually thanks for bringing this up, Megan.
Question for everyone:
xHTML 2.0 or HTML 5?
ahmadalfy posted this at 19:35 — 10th January 2010.
They have: 3 posts
Joined: Jan 2010
I think both are the same thing!
HTML5 introduce the new tags ( header , content , navigation , videos ... etc ) but written with the same rules as xHTML ( closing tags , small letters , correct attributes , proper nesting ... etc )
so It doesn't really matter what will it's name be ... HTML5 or xHTML2.0 ... Just come with something that work correctly!
yMladenov posted this at 18:27 — 12th January 2010.
He has: 33 posts
Joined: Dec 2009
No offence, but I think you gotta get deeper into the standard's specification, if you really think so.
UA creators have to consider certain things and it would suck not to choose the dominant standard in this case. Not to mention that the development of xHTML 2.0 has been quite slow recently. Much slower than HTML 5.0 and that is kinda freaking me out. As if it is not a priority any more.
Somewhere I read that using html code for the xml parser is no good any more and on another site I read that xHTML 2.0 is giving you more flexibility. Since making the proper semantic markup is quite important, this counts.
Want to join the discussion? Create an account or log in if you already have one. Joining is fast, free and painless! We’ll even whisk you back here when you’ve finished.