It does render bad HTML, but that's a bad thing. IE is loose and open to suggestion (like your mother), Firefox does what a browser should to; render the mark up given to it. Nothing more nothing less. A browser shouldn't be expected to second guess developers, that's ridiculous.
Also, as outlined earlier in this thread, IE's rendering engine is broken and inferior compared to Opera's, Safari's or Gecko. I don't know what else you need to see to realize that, and I've offered you proof. You've yet to offer a single bit of proof, aside from your words. And no offense, but just saying that it's better doesn't hold any validity with me.
Btw, I'm joking about your mom. :tongue: I figured this thread could use some humor.
Firefox will still render some horrible code, I've seen it before. It is admittedly less accurate at rendering tag soup though. You can't fault the browser for doing what it should though.
Personally, I don't care if Firefox beats out IE's market share. It doesn't phase me one bit, but Firefox does offer a better user experience and that's what matters to me. You're probably designing your sites with IE in mind though, so it's no wonder they look odd in other browsers. IE's engine is nowhere near as good as Firefox's though, and I've proven this multiple times in this thread.
That's the problem with uneducated users; they see something broken in Firefox and think it's the browser's fault, which it's not. I digress though, it's not like it really matters.
I like Firefox because I can write quick extensions rather than dicking with the horrible Win32 API if I want to add functionality. I can also do things
like this in Firefox, which is awesome in my opinion.
Like I said, 'valid' only means that you're implementing the selectors correctly, not that the design is fool proof. That should be obvious.
Because IE's CSS support is shit.
That's laziness and incorrect. You obviously have to set width on all elemnts, or set them to cascade. You're being lazy and blaming Firefox for doing what it's supposed to do.
Did you even bother looking at the CSSzengarden sites? They prove that Firfox has NO problem with CSS. I really think you're just not wanting to accept that you might be screwing yourself by viewing IE as the standard.
So you're not styling elements that should be styled and blaming Firefox for rendering it improperly? Jesus, that's fucking hilarious.
Also, if you really think a few KB .css file will decrease load times, you're horribly mistaken. The difference, if any, will be negligible.
:lol:
You still say that, even after I've proven how horrible it is, and still without offering one stitch of proof. In addition, you just admitted to being sloppy and lazy about your coding.
:lol:
It's called semantic web development; it's what web developers do!
Anyway man, I don't mean to flame you, but I find it ridiculous when developers blame technology for their shortcomings. I see it all the time with software and web developers alike. There's a right way to do something, and if you do anything less, well, you're a fool to expect perfect results. You've already admitted to causing your own problems, so this conversation is moot.
Suffice it to say that our opinions are different on this issue. I can accept your opinion that IE's engine is better, however, due to your gross inability to provide any proof to your statements, I still contend that you are wrong. Feel free to back up your statemnts though, and offer us some proof.
Good luck with your updates though, I hope you can get them to play nice with Firefox.
last-child);