Site Suggestions

Tuesday January 8th, 2002

A few of you have asked for us to post a news item taking your suggestions for the site, so here it is. Tell us all your ideas for what we can do to improve the site. Anything you want we'll think about, but try to keep it realistic.

Just to keep you updated, one of the things we're planning on working on is getting the ChromeZone up again, if we can find some volunteer editors to help organize themes. If you're interested, please email me and I'll get back to you sometime this week.

UPDATE! Right now we're working on dumping all the tables and other old HTML within the site to both show off Mozilla's skills, and to get our file sizes smaller. If you're using Communicator to view the site, you'll notice everything looking pretty ugly, thanks to the poor CSS support it offers. If you're using IE, it'll look a bit better, but thanks to IE's lacking CSS2 support, the sidebar will show up incorrectly. We've completely redone the homepage and talkback code, and we'll be working on the forums next.

UPDATE 2! We discovered Google's great "Search Site" feature, and have added it. Right now it has most areas of the site indexed except news item talkback pages. It will start indexing talkback today, and will hopefully add all of the old items, in addition to picking up the new ones.

UPDATE 3! We've been working hard to get as many of your suggestions as possible implemented, and we encourage you to continue the feedback. You can check this article's responses for what items we have fixed, or are working on.

#58 Re: not exactly

by ipottinger

Friday January 11th, 2002 6:52 PM

You are replying to this message

Let see if I can state this so you can't miss the point.

--- Your code might adhere to the current specs but without the DOCTYPE new browsers will likely assume it is an old-spec-page and render it in "quirk" mode. Thus, your carefully constructed page gets mangled. ---

"Old-spec-pages" are likely not to have a DOCTYPE. If you are going to write an up-to-current-spec-page, then why not add the DOCTYPE!?! What better way is there to tell the browser that you've "done it right" and *not to assume* that the page was constructed work with the "quirks" of old, non-compliant browsers?