div#div# Another IE CSS Hack technique? — OZONE Asylum, home of the Mad Scientists

CSS - DOM - XHTML - XML - XSL - XSLT

div#div# Another IE CSS Hack technique?

This page's ID: 30572

Edit Post

Who can edit a post?	The poster and administrators may edit a post. The poster can only edit it for a short while after the initial post.

Your User Name:
Your Password:
Login Options:	Remember Me On This Computer

Your Text: Insert Slimies » Insert UBB Code » Close Last Tag \| All Tags UBB Help	[quote][b]HZR said:[/b] The point is that you're wrong in thinking that something becomes invalid (or even non-conforming) just because some UA uses it in a way that it wasn't meant to.[/quote]The HTML spec is also for authors, and when a [i]person[/i] uses an IE conditional comment, that is abuse of an HTML comment. [quote][b]HZR said:[/b] Browsers sniff the doctype declaration. Does that mean that a doctype is invalid as it's not used the way the spec describes?[/quote]No of course not, but if you used a doctype declaration in a way that is at odds with how the spec says it is to be used, it would. [quote][b]DL-44 said:[/b] [quote][b]HZR said:[/b] Do you believe that the CC syntax was valid before IE started to assign special meaning to it, and that is suddenly stopped being valid when they did?[/quote]Just for the record....this is a *completely" irrelevant question. Nobody used the CC syntax before it was "meaningful" to IE. And nobody would. it is used absolutely soley for the purpose of it's non-conformant properties. It is absurd to speak of it outside of that context.[/quote]I'm obviously with DL here: [quote][b]reisio said:[/b] Just as those are invalid because the spec does not include them, so too are IE conditional comments, which are not only not included, but expressly forbidden.[/quote]To be completely technical - no, had someone used certain IE conditional comments before they existed, without knowing what they were, for example thinking they were gibberish, that would not be non-conformant... ...and that is exactly the point. The conscious, willful use of proprietary code by an author makes it non-conformant. The awareness that this information [url=http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/intro/sgmltut.html#h-3.2.4]has special meaning[/url] makes its inclusion non-conformant. [quote][b]liorean said:[/b] The relationship between the spec and a document does not change depending on external factors such as user agents.[/quote]Indeed, the [i]document coder[/i] has authored non-conformant code. [small](Edited by [url=http://www.ozoneasylum.com/user/5575]reisio[/url] on 10-25-2008 06:49)[/small] Loading...
Options:	Enable Slimies Enable Linkwords

« Backwards — Onwards »

Show Forum Drop Down Menu