Re^2: Should we change linking so that conditional comments for IE are not destroyed?


Don't ask to ask, just ask
	PerlMonks

Re^2: Should we change linking so that conditional comments for IE are not destroyed?

by elusion (Curate)

on Nov 05, 2004 at 21:20 UTC ( [id://405643]=note: print w/replies, xml )

Need Help??

in reply to Re: Should we change linking so that conditional comments for IE are not destroyed?
in thread Should we change linking so that conditional comments for IE are not destroyed?

And while we're at it,

<p style="display: none">
<font color="red" size="+4">You should be using a browser that support
+s CSS!</font><br>
<a href="http://mozilla.org">Upgrade now.</a>
</p>
[download]

;-)

elusion : http://matt.diephouse.com

Comment on Re^2: Should we change linking so that conditional comments for IE are not destroyed? Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^3: Should we change linking so that conditional comments for IE are not destroyed?
by Juerd (Abbot) on Nov 06, 2004 at 13:55 UTC

Mozilla isn't an *upgrade* if you're using a different browser. I absolutely HATE the term "upgrade" where used instead of "migrate". For the record, Mozilla does NOT have a non-graphical browser. Besides that, not supporting CSS is a right that browsers have and you are not to tell me what to use. A good website maker makes a site usable for any browser. And CSS makes that easy if used right, so stop complaining.

Note that I have seen your ";-)", but needed to say this because it's the third time I see someone suggesting something like this today.

Juerd # { site => 'juerd.nl', plp_site => 'plp.juerd.nl', do_not_use => 'spamtrap' }

[reply]

In Section Inner Scriptorium