Re: Change to master.xsl to grant accessibility for Netscape 4.x (WAS: @ gets encoded within CDATA)

On Monday 28 November 2005 09:42, Christian Stocker wrote:
> On 26.11.2005 0:50 Uhr, Simon Rönnqvist wrote:
> >   Hi!
> >
> > Here comes some comments on my last post. I opened my book and learnt
> > that the bug (called Flash of Unstyled Content, FOUC) that causes the
> > @import method to flash unstyled content is only present in IE5+ (not IE6
> > as I said). I also tried it out, noticing that it seems not to occur
> > whenever a <link> tag is present anywhere in the same document.
> >
> > My conclusion is that since there are other <link> tags present within
> > master.xsl it's totally safe to use the @import method instead. It's even
> > preferable since most modern CSS stuff causes a mess for Netscape
> > Navigator 4.x users. (If one however wants to server some CSS to NN4 too,
> > then it's better to put those rules in a separate file.)
>
> First of all and honestly, we don't care about NN4 people :)
>
> I'm a bit reluctant adding this change, just because of NN4. OTOH I
> don't have any real arguments of why not doing it this way, except that
> <link> does look nicer and is the more standard way. And that it's
> tested more (the current theme).

  Well, I'll help you with the arguments against it... ;-)
One could consider the @import method a hack, since <link> is the original way 
to do it (as you said). But in general 'the real masters' of CSS usually do 
this to ensure accessibility. Another thing is that one might want to include 
some CSS for NN4 and thereby use <link> and then again use an @import in the 
actual CSS-file to include the stuff that one doesn't want NN4 to see.

> What we could do is to add it commented for the time beeing. Something
> in the direction of "uncomment this, if you want to support NN4" :) I'd
> have nothing against that.

  I just hope most people will bother to look into the XSLT-code. ;-)
I'd think most people would like it enabled. As long as you want to support 
NN4 wihout bothering to even test your pages with it, then it's a good idea. 
But for anybody who doesn't care if NN4 makes their pages a mess or for 
anybody who really cares about styling in NN4 it's not a good idea.

The reason why I do care a little bit about NN4 users is that I learn't as a 
Mac-support guy two years ago that very many people still actually used their 
old MacOS 9 (or even 8.x) machines with NN4. I think there were many people 
faithfully using NN4 since they had always used NN and didn't feel 
comfortable with NN6 (once it came), and didn't want to use Explorer. From 
this vast group of people there might be a couple left. ;-) According to 
statistics maybe below 1%, but still a few. (Poor little things. ;-)

> Concerning your other mentioned changes. Yes, I'd rarther not want to
> change the current xslts, as it may break a lot of CSS out there, but
> there's nothing wrong with publishing that as its own theme. Speaking of
> that, we maybe need a nicer theme updater/chooser, than we have
> currently. There are quite some nice themes on
> http://intensivstation.ch/templates/bxcms/, but I don't want to include
> them in the standard distribution.

  Yes, an updater/chooser seems like a nice idea.
Especially for Freeflux users who may find it hard to install themes manually.

  cheers, Simon
-- 
bitflux-cms mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.bitflux.ch/cgi-bin/listinfo/bitflux-cms