Web Browser Bitch Fest (also: Kuro's gay code)

[Alice]

Code: [Select]

ul.nav {
  list-style: none;
  margin: 0px;
  margin-top: .5em;
  margin-bottom: 1em;
  padding: 0px;
}
ul.nav li {
  width: 128px;
  height: 48px;
  display: inline;
  margin-left: 1.2em;
  margin-right: 1.2em;
  border-top: .3em solid #600;
  border-left: .3em solid #500;
  border-right: .3em solid #200;
  border-bottom: .3em solid #200;
  color: #700;
  font-family: arial;
  font-size: 1.0em;
  font-weight: bold;
  font-style: italic;
  background-color: #500;
}
ul.nav li:hover {
  border-top: .3em solid #700;
  border-left: .3em solid #600;
  border-right: .3em solid #300;
  border-bottom: .3em solid #300;
  background-color: #600;
}
ul.nav li:active {
  border-top: .3em solid #100;
  border-left: .3em solid #100;
  border-right: .3em solid #300;
  border-bottom: .3em solid #500;
  color: #400;
  background-color: #300;
}
ul.nav a {
  text-decoration: none;
  color: #d58;
}
ul.nav li:hover a {
  color: #f8a;
}
ul.nav li:active a {
  color: #a26;
}

So you think the <li> things would be 128x48, right?   NO THEY AREN'T WHAT THE HELL

or maybe they are and my web browser sux?

[Spectere]

SEE, THIS IS WHY I DON'T DO WEB DESIGN.

If I had to take a guess, I'd say that UL only covers text, not backgrounds.  What you could try doing is either using DIVs to do the same thing, wrapping UL tags around a sized DIV (not sure if that would work) or wrapping sized DIV tags around the ULs.

HTML/CSS ARE BITCHES THAT DESERVE TO ROT IN HELLLLLLLLLLLLLLL.

[Alice]

UR RITE LOL LETS ROUND UP THE ANTI-BARKNESS KREW AND WAGE WAR AGAINST HTML/CSS

Ah, that makes sense I guess (NOT REALLY, FUCK YOU CSS).  So, if I put a DIV inside all of the LIs, do you think it would work? :-D

Actually, doing that would fix some of my already existing issues (maybe).  I think I'll do that.  Thank you sir! :-)

[Spectere]

UR RITE LOL LETS ROUND UP THE ANTI-BARKNESS KREW AND WAGE WAR AGAINST HTML/CSS

I STRONGLY AGREE SIR

Ah, that makes sense I guess (NOT REALLY, FUCK YOU CSS).  So, if I put a DIV inside all of the LIs, do you think it would work? :-D

Maybe.  It's the best chance you have, though.

Actually, doing that would fix some of my already existing issues (maybe).  I think I'll do that.  Thank you sir! :-)

Awesome.  I hope that works and you don't wind up having to swim through any more exciting W3 documents to fix it.

[Alice]

Well sir it did not work so I just went back to the way I had it before, but thank you anyway!  I just changed the words on the buttons so they were more evened up, and decreased the padding, so that a user would have less of a chance to miss the link.  Stupid CSS.

[Spectere]

Aw pookyfuckers =(

SORRY I STEERED YOU WRONG, LUV

[Alice]

ITS OKAY I STILL <3 YOU

[Zakamiro]

gay

That explains everything. Maybe you should make your website more gay to match the code, maybe that will fix it.

[Spectere]

That explains everything. Maybe you should make your website more gay to match the code, maybe that will fix it.

Nah, that'll only fix it on IE versions 7 and under (or 8 with IE7 emulation enabled).

[Zakamiro]

Nah, that'll only fix it on IE versions 7 and under (or 8 with IE7 emulation enabled).

two wrongs make a right. I guess. Or some completely nasty frankenstein bullshit.

[Spectere]

Or some completely nasty frankenstein bullshit.

Funny you should mention that -- that's precisely what pre-IE8 page hacks look like.  CSS support in IE6/7 is quite broken -- it's the Netscape 4 of the modern browsers.

It's good to see that IE8 might actually be competitive; I might actually become somewhat interested in web design/programming again if this keeps up (and if I do I'll make it a point NOT to design for IE6/7).

[Bobbias]

I'd just write a page that says if you don't have FF, don't expect my site to work for you, because I'm a lazy bastard, and IE sucks.

[Alice]

IE is used by over 9000 percent of internet users

giving them the bird is like giving the entire internet the bird

it's better to spend a few more minutes making something work on everything instead of telling the majority of the internet to fuck off

[Bobbias]

The way I see it, just because the majority of people do something, doesn't mean they should. I'd rather proactively change the internet (even if it's only in a very small way) than sit back and let the majority of people have their way, just because there's more of them than me.

It's not like I'm sending them a page saying "get Firefox" and then redirecting them to the FF download page. I'm just saying that I honestly don't care if IE is a piece of shit, and I'm not going to waste my time catering to people who don't have the sense (or knowledge that it exists) to get FF or any other standards compliant browser.

As spectere said, the CSS support (and other quirks) in IE6/7 are quite painful at times, and require some pretty mangled code to work, at times. I'm not going to waste my time writing code that no self-respecting coder should ever have to write, just to cater to people who aren't concerned about using a standards compliant browser. If it breaks on them, maybe they'll see the light and chose a browser that doesn't suck.

Not to mention that IE 8 fixes quite a few of those nasty issues in the IE rendering system, so by the times that comes out and is in widespread use, there'll be no need for those ridiculous hacks.

[itsgravy]

OK, this is going to be long...  From my HTML/CSS experience, I'd say forget the ul.nav class bull.  Try this out:

#nav,  #nav ul {
 //Preferences for all lists here IE:spacing etc
}

#nav li{
 //preferences for the actual list items here IE:color
}

#nav li:hover  #nav ul:hover {
 //For when you hover over the item
}



So... your html code should look something like this:

<div id="nav">
 <li> item
  <ul> item </ul>
  <ul> item </ul>
 </li>
</div>

But, as said before, :hover doesn't work in IE.  For that you'd be better working with javascript (which is the tag language equivalent to trying to ride a bull).  Tell me how that works out for you, getting kinda tired but I'm pretty sure it'll work.