Eric A. Meyer said:
> Let's not start an argument over whose workaround is more
> ideologically pure, please. A workaround is a workaround, no matter how you slice it. For those
who place more
> priority on structural cleanliness, CSS-based hacks will be preferred. Those who like to keep
the CSS clean will
> tend toward hacking the HTML. Neither is really preferable to the other in a purely objective
sense, while both
> are awful (or desirable) from given subjective views. Let's try to avoid too much subjective
invective, shall we?
A good point, and definately a poor choice of words on my part (this should learn me not to iron my
clothes and attempt
concise, descriptive technical prose at the same time :P ). More appropriately, I should have said
that I felt writing
CSS in the "spirit" of the standards was more important than writing truly cross-platform code, if
you had the option of
hacking some cross-platform styles on at the end. My style has been to write for the magical,
browser which implements the standards correctly, and provide CSS workarounds for those browsers
which don't quite make
the grade. I guess it just makes me feel ready for the day when that browser does exist.
Although it was a mistake to bring ideology into this thread, I have learned quite a bit about the
various approaches to
cross-browser development, and I appreciate your restraint in not killing it outright.