Spent 3 hours of unbillable time this morning trying to get my CSS
layout to work in FF and IE.  Without success in IE. And I am not a
beginner.

In desperation I used a table.  Got it working perfectly in ten minutes.




-- 
Geoff Berrow  0110001001101100010000000110
001101101011011001000110111101100111001011
100110001101101111001011100111010101101011

<uk.net.web.authoring>
<Geoff Berrow>
<Mon, 16 Jun 2008 14:37:59 +0100>


> Spent 3 hours of unbillable time this morning trying to get my CSS
> layout to work in FF and IE.  Without success in IE. And I am not a
> beginner.
> 
> In desperation I used a table.  Got it working perfectly in ten minutes.
> 

ZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzz .


-- 
www.krustov.co.uk

"Geoff Berrow"  wrote in message 
news:8rqc545p8di0d821pntnv48t1qefvg4ncc@4ax.com...
> Spent 3 hours of unbillable time this morning trying to get my CSS
> layout to work in FF and IE.  Without success in IE. And I am not a
> beginner.
>
> In desperation I used a table.  Got it working perfectly in ten minutes.
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Geoff Berrow  0110001001101100010000000110
> 001101101011011001000110111101100111001011
> 100110001101101111001011100111010101101011

What does practice make?

If you post your finished layout URL I'm sure we'd love the challenge of 
rendering it in CSS.

+mrcakey

On 16/6/08 2:37 pm, in article 8rqc545p8di0d821pntnv48t1qefvg4ncc@4ax.com,
"Geoff Berrow"  wrote:

> Spent 3 hours of unbillable time this morning trying to get my CSS
> layout to work in FF and IE.  Without success in IE. And I am not a
> beginner.
> 
> In desperation I used a table.  Got it working perfectly in ten minutes.
> 
> 
> 

Outsource it!  $88 for even the most difficult layout and it comes back to
you in about 48 hours allowing you to concentrate on billable work.

-- 
Andy Jacobs
http://www.redcatmedia.co.uk

Message-ID: <C47C7347.11498%nospam@redcatgroup.co.uk> from Andy Jacobs
contained the following:

>
>Outsource it!  $88 for even the most difficult layout and it comes back to
>you in about 48 hours allowing you to concentrate on billable work.

That would be ok for a new project from scratch but this job has grown
like Topsy and I've not been the only one working on it

It really needs taking down to bare bones but there ain't the budget or
inclination to do it.

Client supplied some html ('can you just bung this up there...') in a
table layout so I thought sod it...

But really my main point is this.  I got this thing looking beautiful in
Firefox.  Squirted it at IE6 and it just went haywire.  Who knows what
would happen in other browsers.  Whereas, I'd dare place a small bet
that my table will work on pretty much anything.

Until all browsers render CSS in a predictable way I just don't think
it's worth the risk.
-- 
Geoff Berrow  0110001001101100010000000110
001101101011011001000110111101100111001011
100110001101101111001011100111010101101011

<uk.net.web.authoring>
<Geoff Berrow>
<Mon, 16 Jun 2008 20:35:40 +0100>


> Until all browsers render CSS in a predictable way I just don't think
> it's worth the risk.
> 

FFS get over yourself dude - and just build the fucking website :-)


-- 
www.krustov.co.uk

"Geoff Berrow"  wrote in message 
news:8rqc545p8di0d821pntnv48t1qefvg4ncc@4ax.com...
> Spent 3 hours of unbillable time this morning trying to get my CSS
> layout to work in FF and IE.  Without success in IE. And I am not a
> beginner.
>
> In desperation I used a table.  Got it working perfectly in ten minutes.

Well they do work, for all the criti/sarcasm the jobsworths give them.

I'm wondering how long until psuedos like :before come into play seeing as 
IE7 doesn't even recognise them, 21% of all still v6 (crackguitar stats). I 
never did check on v8 before I dumped it.

-dE|_---

"Geoff Berrow"  wrote in message 
news:8rqc545p8di0d821pntnv48t1qefvg4ncc@4ax.com...
> Spent 3 hours of unbillable time this morning trying to get my CSS
> layout to work in FF and IE.  Without success in IE. And I am not a
> beginner.
>
> In desperation I used a table.  Got it working perfectly in ten minutes.

Well I just got IE6 back on my PC, checked out my last job (V. happy 
customer) and it nearly made me jump.

Good thing this guy deals with hi-tech people, most probably Mac.

-dE|_---

Message-ID: <KKM5k.23$Nn.18@newsfe09.ams2> from dE|_ contained the
following:

>> In desperation I used a table.  Got it working perfectly in ten minutes.
>
>Well they do work, for all the criti/sarcasm the jobsworths give them.

I'm not arguing against the use of CSS layout or the principles of
semantic markup, but in practice I don't think it is ever going to work
unless a number of things happen.

1. The same valid markup must produce predictable results.  It's no good
having something that looks beautiful in FF that falls apart in a
version of  IE, even if it's not the fault of the markup.

2. An easy to use authoring tool is developed that allows the masses to
create valid and accessible pages.

3. Microsoft support it.
(take a look at this in FF
http://www.microsoft.com/expression/products/overview.aspx?key=web)






-- 
Geoff Berrow  0110001001101100010000000110
001101101011011001000110111101100111001011
100110001101101111001011100111010101101011

Andy Jacobs wrote:
> On 16/6/08 2:37 pm, in article 8rqc545p8di0d821pntnv48t1qefvg4ncc@4ax.com,
> "Geoff Berrow"  wrote:
> 
>> Spent 3 hours of unbillable time this morning trying to get my CSS
>> layout to work in FF and IE.  Without success in IE. And I am not a
>> beginner.
>>
>> In desperation I used a table.  Got it working perfectly in ten minutes.
>>
> 
> Outsource it!  $88 for even the most difficult layout and it comes back to
> you in about 48 hours allowing you to concentrate on billable work.

Do you have a link for that $88 layout provider?

"Geoff Berrow"  wrote in message 
news:sk6f54to0adt05gai523cii4mvjrq053fh@4ax.com...
> Message-ID: <KKM5k.23$Nn.18@newsfe09.ams2> from dE|_ contained the
> following:
>
>>> In desperation I used a table.  Got it working perfectly in ten minutes.
>>
>>Well they do work, for all the criti/sarcasm the jobsworths give them.
>
> I'm not arguing against the use of CSS layout or the principles of
> semantic markup, but in practice I don't think it is ever going to work
> unless a number of things happen.
>
> 1. The same valid markup must produce predictable results.  It's no good
> having something that looks beautiful in FF that falls apart in a
> version of  IE, even if it's not the fault of the markup.
>
> 2. An easy to use authoring tool is developed that allows the masses to
> create valid and accessible pages.
>
> 3. Microsoft support it.
> (take a look at this in FF
> http://www.microsoft.com/expression/products/overview.aspx?key=web)

I'm with you all the way. Mark-up is so bloody simple- well it's not exactly 
C++ , that I can only imagine they plant their differences to force 
preference. Something like 20% of my development time still goes on 
cross-browser bug discovering/fixing and it gets my goat.

I think FF is pretty petty that you can't maximise a video on YouTube, it's 
not exactly a rare site or an unknown broadcast format. A friend got an ear 
full post-pub when we discovered that.

-dE|_---

Geoff Berrow wrote:

> Spent 3 hours of unbillable time this morning trying to get my CSS
> layout to work in FF and IE.  Without success in IE. And I am not a
> beginner.
>
> In desperation I used a table.  Got it working perfectly in ten minutes.
>
>
>
>
It really is not that hard to get a CSS layout to do what you want.
Then again I have been useing the stuff for 2 years!
You just need to learn what the various selectors do. Oh and how
floats and the like work.
--
Regards Chad. http://freewebdesignonline.org

On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 19:45:11 +0100, Andy Jacobs
 wrote:

>On 16/6/08 2:37 pm, in article 8rqc545p8di0d821pntnv48t1qefvg4ncc@4ax.com,
>"Geoff Berrow"  wrote:
>
>> Spent 3 hours of unbillable time this morning trying to get my CSS
>> layout to work in FF and IE.  Without success in IE. And I am not a
>> beginner.
>> 
>> In desperation I used a table.  Got it working perfectly in ten minutes.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>
>Outsource it!  $88 for even the most difficult layout and it comes back to
>you in about 48 hours allowing you to concentrate on billable work.

Andy
I looked at your site and you say £2-3kfor a website
how does that equates with $88 for even the most difficult layout?

Regards

David M Wicker
www.reflexology-gemma.co.uk
Guildford UK

On 25/6/08 11:36 pm, in article s0i564dbm786nahnqrh7i1ek6gko7k2fbo@4ax.com,
"david m wicker"  wrote:

> On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 19:45:11 +0100, Andy Jacobs
>  wrote:
> 
>> On 16/6/08 2:37 pm, in article 8rqc545p8di0d821pntnv48t1qefvg4ncc@4ax.com,
>> "Geoff Berrow"  wrote:
>> 
>>> Spent 3 hours of unbillable time this morning trying to get my CSS
>>> layout to work in FF and IE.  Without success in IE. And I am not a
>>> beginner.
>>> 
>>> In desperation I used a table.  Got it working perfectly in ten minutes.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> Outsource it!  $88 for even the most difficult layout and it comes back to
>> you in about 48 hours allowing you to concentrate on billable work.
> 
> Andy
> I looked at your site and you say £2-3kfor a website
> how does that equates with $88 for even the most difficult layout?

I'm not sure of the point you're trying to make here but generally a project
will be formed of the following stages:

Me going to a meeting to discuss the clients requirements.

I then brief the designer who will spend a day putting together 2 or 3
ideas.

The developer installs the content management system and makes any changes
to the functionality that the client needs.

I then liaise with the client and we do a round or 2 of changes to the
design to get it how the client wants it.

Another person in the office liaises with the client to get all the images
and content, buying stock images if required.

The same person then populates the content management system with the
content from the client

He also sets up Google Analytics, installs the site onto our Google
Webmaster Tools account, creates and submits an XML site map to Google,
registers the site for a Google Map API if required, and populates the
metatags based on the content on each page.

Once the design is signed off we send it off for slicing  <<<<$88>>>>

The design comes back as xhtml and CSS and we integrate the design with the
CMS

I then go back to the client and spend 3 or 4 hours on site training them to
use the CMS and going through any last minute changes they want.

Does that answer your question?  Hopefully that makes it clear just what a
small part of any project the slicing up is.

-- 
Andy Jacobs
http://www.redcatmedia.co.uk

Andy,

Thanks for patiently explaining the processes!

I'd love to know two things:

> Once the design is signed off we send it off for slicing  <<<<$88>>>>

Who do you use for this, and...

> The design comes back as xhtml and CSS and we integrate the design with the
> CMS

...how come they can reliably product HTML and CSS than can be
integrated into your CMS without a massive rewrite?  Either they're
able to specifically target your CMS for that low price (impressive)
or your CMS can handle any arbitrary HTML/CSS you care to throw at it
(even more impressive!)

Thanks,

--
Richie

On 27/6/08 1:09 pm, in article
db80c3bf-8a53-44e6-b7d3-c769f4283945@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com, "Richie
Hindle"  wrote:

> Andy,
> 
> Thanks for patiently explaining the processes!
> 
> I'd love to know two things:
> 
>> Once the design is signed off we send it off for slicing  <<<<$88>>>>
> 
> Who do you use for this, and...

I use one of 2 companies.  Both are in the Ukraine.  I thought that one was
in India but I assumed that as their domain ends in .in.

One company is www.psd2html.com, the other is one I only have an e-mail
address for which I'm not going to put here - for obvious reasons.  E-mail
me if you want it and I'll send it to you.

> 
>> The design comes back as xhtml and CSS and we integrate the design with the
>> CMS
> 
> ...how come they can reliably product HTML and CSS than can be
> integrated into your CMS without a massive rewrite?  Either they're
> able to specifically target your CMS for that low price (impressive)
> or your CMS can handle any arbitrary HTML/CSS you care to throw at it
> (even more impressive!)

I think it's a combination of both.  We wrote our own CMS in house and it's
very modular in the way that it's integrated.  There are just a few lines of
PHP which get inserted here and there to make relevant content dynamic and
that's it.  All the classes are very resilient and it's easy to call a
function to display a vertical menu instead of a horizontal menu or a menu
with dropdowns, etc.  All the navigation is CSS driven with ul/lis, even the
dropdowns.

The next iteration will use our own tags so it will be a simple case of
putting something like <<<verticalMenu>>> or whatever.

The point is, it takes about an hour to swap the static html with some
simple PHP and the job's done.

-- 
Andy Jacobs
http://www.redcatmedia.co.uk

Andy Jacobs wrote:

> On 25/6/08 11:36 pm, in article s0i564dbm786nahnqrh7i1ek6gko7k2fbo@4ax.com,
> "david m wicker"  wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 19:45:11 퍝, Andy Jacobs
> >  wrote:
> >
> >> On 16/6/08 2:37 pm, in article 8rqc545p8di0d821pntnv48t1qefvg4ncc@4ax.com,
> >> "Geoff Berrow"  wrote:
> >>
> >>> Spent 3 hours of unbillable time this morning trying to get my CSS
> >>> layout to work in FF and IE.  Without success in IE. And I am not a
> >>> beginner.
> >>>
> >>> In desperation I used a table.  Got it working perfectly in ten minutes.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> Outsource it!  $88 for even the most difficult layout and it comes back to
> >> you in about 48 hours allowing you to concentrate on billable work.
> >
> > Andy
> > I looked at your site and you say �2-3kfor a website
> > how does that equates with $88 for even the most difficult layout?
>
> I'm not sure of the point you're trying to make here but generally a project
> will be formed of the following stages:
>
> Me going to a meeting to discuss the clients requirements.
>
> I then brief the designer who will spend a day putting together 2 or 3
> ideas.
>
> The developer installs the content management system and makes any changes
> to the functionality that the client needs.
>
> I then liaise with the client and we do a round or 2 of changes to the
> design to get it how the client wants it.
>
> Another person in the office liaises with the client to get all the images
> and content, buying stock images if required.
>
> The same person then populates the content management system with the
> content from the client
>
> He also sets up Google Analytics, installs the site onto our Google
> Webmaster Tools account, creates and submits an XML site map to Google,
> registers the site for a Google Map API if required, and populates the
> metatags based on the content on each page.
>
> Once the design is signed off we send it off for slicing  <<<<$88>>>>
>
> The design comes back as xhtml and CSS and we integrate the design with the
> CMS
>
But Andy don't you get sick of having to work out what other peoples
code is doing?

> I then go back to the client and spend 3 or 4 hours on site training them to
> use the CMS and going through any last minute changes they want.
>
> Does that answer your question?  Hopefully that makes it clear just what a
> small part of any project the slicing up is.
>
Well yes it does. But it also explains a few of the issues that your
sites have, such as useing absolute units.
--
Regards Chad. http://freewebdesignonline.org

On 3/7/08 1:07 pm, in article
b40babb2-fc9e-4a72-b3d6-2039b19acf8e@u36g2000prf.googlegroups.com,
"Chaddy2222"  wrote:

 
> But Andy don't you get sick of having to work out what other peoples
> code is doing?

What is there to work out?

> 
>> I then go back to the client and spend 3 or 4 hours on site training them to
>> use the CMS and going through any last minute changes they want.
>> 
>> Does that answer your question?  Hopefully that makes it clear just what a
>> small part of any project the slicing up is.
>> 
> Well yes it does. But it also explains a few of the issues that your
> sites have, such as useing absolute units.

Ah ha!  Watch this space!  We're just about to launch a new site for Redcat.

-- 
Andy Jacobs
http://www.redcatmedia.co.uk

Andy Jacobs wrote:

> On 3/7/08 1:07 pm, in article
> b40babb2-fc9e-4a72-b3d6-2039b19acf8e@u36g2000prf.googlegroups.com,
> "Chaddy2222"  wrote:
>
>
> > But Andy don't you get sick of having to work out what other peoples
> > code is doing?
>
> What is there to work out?

That really depends, some CSS based templates use some rather complex
names for classes etc.

>
> >
> >> I then go back to the client and spend 3 or 4 hours on site training them to
> >> use the CMS and going through any last minute changes they want.
> >>
> >> Does that answer your question?  Hopefully that makes it clear just what a
> >> small part of any project the slicing up is.
> >>
> > Well yes it does. But it also explains a few of the issues that your
> > sites have, such as useing absolute units.
>
> Ah ha!  Watch this space!  We're just about to launch a new site for Redcat.
>
That sounds good. BTW I took your advice on useing min and max widths
to limit the line lenths of the text.
--
Regards Chad. http://freewebdesignonline.org