In article <43DDDC22.4050204(a)rowing.org.uk>, Andrew Hodgkinson
David J. Ruck wrote:
> It is unreasonable to expect sites which meet the W3C standards
> the time they were written, to be re-written because a browser has
> left out support for legacy tags.
Indeed. The next person who nags me about OTHER PEOPLES' sites which
"must, Must, MUST use CSS" may get a punch in the froat. I'm getting sick
and tired of people bleating on about how we must use CSS when, as Druck
rightly points out, and has been pointed out <i>ad nauseam</i> here and
elsewhere, support for legacy sites (if you will) and those people stuck
in the "Dark Ages" is ESSENTIAL in a modern browser.
Unless you know about a version of FrontPage on my mate's machine which
does CSS and doesn't fill a page with <font ... > tags. Or tell me how I
convert every site I haven't visited yet into CSS? Hmm? Well, canya?
Meanwhile, good though Netsurf is, I've not yet been able to
why the "Pond's Place" heading bumps vertically into the subheading at
"http://pond.org.uk/" or why the navigation sidebars seem to move
randomly towards the left hand margin as you flick from page to page,
squashing the text to the left into ever more narrow columns. That's
probably all down to CSS, you know - maybe I should chuck a few more
deprecated tags in there =;*)
With regard to NetSurf's positioning of fonts, some interesting effects
(toys) are available in HTML³ but they render with incorrect positioning
in NetSurf. 'Arch' and 'Trough', for example, appear to be swapped around
in NetSurf and can also be described as a bit higgledy-piggledy. It seems
that NetSurf positions one letter relative to the previous one, rather
than relative to a baseline, or somesuch.