Topic: Which browser used to test your design?

Hi there,

I'm curious...

Which browser do you use to test your page, once your nifty little xhtdomccs'yl is written down in the marble?

Opera is supposed to be the most standard compliant, no? Should I really prefer this one?

OMERA:

:FAQ:

___________________
Emps

FAQs: Emperor

OOOOPss!!

sorrry..

[edit]
Hum. Just read the faq and I found it a little bit "blurry"...

My problem is : when I design a page, I'm not sure it's well designed. So my question will rather be: which is the best standard compliant browser to use as a reference to "validate" my css+xhtml layout.

thanks!

[This message has been edited by OMERA (edited 02-19-2003).]

OMERA: Blurry? Care to expand on that? If things aren't clear we can look into better ways of doing things.

You shouldn't validate your code using a browser - they are all poor for that kind of thing. Use the W3C's validators.

You need to do the cross-browser testing to see what the pages actually look like.

___________________
Emps

FAQs: Emperor

When I develope I usually have 8 applications running.

1 Photoshop
2 HTML Editor with built in IE6 browser
3 Mozilla 1.x
4 Opera 7
5 Netscape 6.2
6 Opera 6
7 Opera 5
8 Netscape 4

I have the page I'm working on loaded into each browser. Then if I want to check my site I just switch windows hitting the refresh/reload button. Although I don't really support Opera 6/5 or Netscape 4 it's nice to check that you can still access the content from those browsers. I also have Netscape 2 & 3 installed on this machine but I hardely ever bother checking them with those browsers. Every now and then I'll also switch PC's and check it on my WIndows 98 Box with IE 5.0.

Well : of course, as a goooooddd web dizinner, I do test with different browsers!
Nevertheless, thank you for you advices!

So, to be a little bit more precise: Problem arise when I got different layouts in differents browser... one float, another not... one apply margins, another not... so which is right, and which is wrong?

Before trying to "hack" my code to please everyone, I would have been glad to say "ok, here is how it MUST look"!

To sum up: I need to be sure which is the CORRECT layout for a given css+xhtml, to fix things up.
Ok, I could refer myself to the specs: but they sometimes are a little bit too "technical" and obscure to provide an instant and acurate answer...


[edit]
About the faq: Please, be reassured, it's just from my point of view a little lack of precisions.
Maybe some precisions in the goal would have been welcome.
"What browsers should I test my web site with?" is ok, but I think that the " for what purpose" part is missing.

IMHO, you should precise in the question something like "to test my standard compliance" " to glue with the market tendencies" etc... or at least make some subpart.

I know it's said "should give you a good idea of the range of browser differences", but why not making different "which browsers for this constraints, blabla"
See what I mean?

(Sorry for the terrible english, it's been a long time since I didn't practised it... )

[This message has been edited by OMERA (edited 02-20-2003).]

Well, the problem, no single browser get's everything right. Thus the ongoing efforts by the glorious people at www.webstandards.org

If there was a single browser that got it all right you could bet your left testicle that every web developer worth his weight in shit would be singing it's name from the rooftops. However, in out not-yet-perfect-web, Mozilla, Opera 7 and Internet Explorer 5.1 for the Mac seem to be the best at getting the standards and *only* the standards correct. IE 6 is also quite good but there are many things that will work in IE6 that really shouldn't and there are a couple of things it should do that it doesn't so try to avoid testing with *just* this browser.

However, IE6 Win is the most used browser on the net so even though it may be a little lax in some areas, making sure your sites work in IE is just as, if not more so, important than using strict standards. After all, what's the point of standards if they don't work?

Being standards compliant it great but if your site doesn't work in at least 80% of the web's most popular browsers (that'd be IE6 and IE5.5) then where's the benefit to using them?

Well, that's not to say that standards should be abandoned. It means that you should use the subset of standards that popular browsers understand. This makes our lives more difficult, but with some practice it's not half as much of a limitation as it was a year or two ago, and it's a very viable solution.

Did I not say that?

No... oops. Silly me. I think I was a little to focused on the "Which browser do you use to test your page, once your nifty little xhtdomccs'yl is written down in the marble?" bit, which is a wonderful idea in theory, currently a little flawed in parctice.

Omear, you might also want to do a google search on "CSS tests". Many people have gone through each browser with a fine tooth comb checking how each CSS property renders against the standards and making notes about any bugs etc...

Hm, correct me if I'm wrong here, but isn't Amaya supposed to be W3C's reference browser for (amongst other things) standards adherence? http://www.w3.org/Amaya/

That said, even if your page works perfect in amaya it might/will act up differently in other browsers and that's where the tests really start.

As it's been said numerous times before in this thread, knowing the standards and beeing able to code and test in a 100% standards compliant enviroment is one thing. To implement this knowledge in real life you need to test your pages in the actual enviroment your users will have. Otherwise the page will not be as useful as it could be to the users.
/Dan

{cell 260}
-{ a vibration is a movement that doesn't know which way to go }-