Elena

[Brian R.]

Elena,

you wrote

"The framework is aware of the browser level and sends HTML suitable to the
level of the
browser (IE 4.0, IE 5.5, Netscape whatever). This gets around the need to
check browser types (IE or Netscape) and levels."

Okay, I am probably extending what you are saying with wishful thinking.
You say it detects browser types, okay. But does it convert MS HTML(DHTML)
into the Netscape equivalent version?

It sounds like the .NET studio is already worth it for web developers, but
if it did this, that would take the cake. I suppose it doesn't do it, but
my eyes were getting that 'wide as saucers' look for a moment.

I am not a real web developer yet, but was reading up on it (DHTML), and
Netscape does seem to be a bit of a pain, just like my teacher told us.
I can't get layer tags to work in the latest version of Netscape's browser.
I am lost on where Netscape is at with its newest browser version.

Sincerely,

Brian R.

[MarkN]

One reason I avoid HMTL intefaces at almost all costs.


"Brian R." <CISconsultant@netscape.net> wrote:
>
>Elena,
>
>you wrote
>
>"The framework is aware of the browser level and sends HTML suitable to
the
>level of the
>browser (IE 4.0, IE 5.5, Netscape whatever). This gets around the need
to
>check browser types (IE or Netscape) and levels."
>
>Okay, I am probably extending what you are saying with wishful thinking.
> You say it detects browser types, okay. But does it convert MS HTML(DHTML)
>into the Netscape equivalent version?
>
>It sounds like the .NET studio is already worth it for web developers, but
>if it did this, that would take the cake. I suppose it doesn't do it, but
>my eyes were getting that 'wide as saucers' look for a moment.
>
>I am not a real web developer yet, but was reading up on it (DHTML), and
>Netscape does seem to be a bit of a pain, just like my teacher told us.

>I can't get layer tags to work in the latest version of Netscape's browser.
> I am lost on where Netscape is at with its newest browser version.
>
>Sincerely,
>
>Brian R.

[Michael Q. Gautier]

Even though IE has taken more marketshare, I still test many of my web applications
on Netscape 4.03 for those sites that have a cross browser requirement. Netscape
does support DHTML but it varies between versions and in comparison to IE.
In the past, before ASP .NET, I successfully coded JavaScript/CSS that worked
consistently between the browsers as long as I avoided Browser specific extensions
and the like.

With ASP .NET several of the control output DHTML to the browsers that can
render them properly, but for Netscape 4.03, it almost all HTML 3.2. I find
this satisfactory from the standpoint of not having to write generic JavaScript
(or JavaScript period). Since most QA of web applications, these days, takes
place on IE, such a variance in client behavior is easily accepted.

Another good option would be the use of Macromedia Flash MX for the UI in
combination with Flash Remoting for .NET or Java where you could leverage
a rich, cross browser, consistent UI and still have your application code
the way you want it. As soon as .NET/Java Remoting comes out of beta, I will
start to migrate that way since the application of that technology avoids
the .NET client distribution problems with Windows Forms, while giving you
the benefit of higher performance, presentation fidelity and appropriateness
to data entry applications.

[simon]

"Michael Q. Gautier" <gautier_michael@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3d2ccd26$1@10.1.10.29...
>
> Even though IE has taken more marketshare, I still test many of my web
applications
> on Netscape 4.03 for those sites that have a cross browser requirement.
<snip>

Yupe. Probably the only people that are still using NN are the AOL folks,
so who cares, right? Haha, just kidding.

Anyway, same here. We have to make sure our codes will run on NN also.

simon.