why not a standard rendering engine to solve cross browser problems [closed] - cross-browser

Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
Why do browsers use different rendering engines, this causes the problem i hate the most "make your html/css compatible with all major web browsers". why don't they use one rendering engine as a standard and this will save a lot of time and effort for all developpers. In fact this is what i hate about IT industry "Conccurence at the expence of the user". We can say the same about Operating systems. Why not only one ?

A predominant reason besides many many others: Competition. See here and here.
Think along these lines: Acme Software Inc develops the only HTML renderer in existence. One day, a huge security vulnerability is discovered that means every browser in existence will now carry the same defect with no alternative to switch to and hence all the computers on Earth are infected and Skynet becomes a reality. Not to mention that Acme Software Inc doesn't want to give away its intellectual property so that the defect can be fixed ASAP.
This is what competition and diversification of supply avoids.

Related

Multilingual Website HTML best solutions [closed]

Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
I am currently building an HTML web site and i need the make it multilingual ...
so i was asking what are the best solutions?
Should I use sub domains http://en.mysite.com, or make it simple, e.g.:
mysite.com/en/index.htm -
mysite.com/fr/index.htm
Should I translate everything for all language or are there tools to auto translate?
Finally, how can I make the website detect the users location and redirect him to his language?
Generally, I would say to have higher rank in search engines it might be better to avoid subdomains.
Since you only have HTML, the redirection solutions are not good enough to consider them. For instance if someone decide to visit English version from Paris, to avoid annoying redirections you might need to keep track of this choice by cookies.
Instead of redirection you can still suggest a language for them (according to their location). It's possible by google loader: https://developers.google.com/loader/
You could use /your/path?lang=en.
To detect the users language, see: https://stackoverflow.com/a/8199791/1500022

When to use Foundation/Bootstrap or custom css? [closed]

Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
So this has been a topic of debate between me and another coder. We are using foundation for a project and he really likes following the system they provide. I like to venture out when it doesn't fit exactly.
An example was this was when I was doing the login form and I wanted a singular sized view that looks the same on every view. I created a login form with a solid width and centered with margins. He comes back to the code and puts it in foundation with large/medium/small columns. The justification was that they know how to handle responsiveness better than us. I just wanted stack overflow's opinion on this one.
When is it right to use a css framework and when should you go outside of it?
I guess on big projects, where you'd like to use each an every feature that a css framework provides, you should go for it. Whereas in small websites, using Bootstrap/Foundation would be a slow-down factor.
Otherwise if you are confident with building a responsive framework yourself, you should go ahead. But, if you feel you aren't take help from others in the form of css frameworks.
This question is way too broad and there can be many possible answers. The above is just my point of view.
First of all if you already have experience with one framework, unless you're doing it for research stick with it.
Otherwise you could check this comparison.
Also if you're using a web framework like Rails, Spring MVC, etc, check the integration status between the both frameworks.
Another point you should care is the community, and in my humble opinion bootstrap wins (as my personal perception).

Providing website in only html 5? [closed]

Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
I am designing a website which has to reach old and new browsers. With this in mind should I program in HTML5? Currently the website is only in html 5. The question is: Is it stupid in my case to use HTML5, should I use a "switch"(is this even possible) to redirect old browsers?
The question is, what aspects of html5 do you plan to use?
If your website is mostly static html & javascript, no audio and no embedded video, then I would say it use HTML4.
If your not using any tags in html5 dont rush it, no
If you're trying to reach a broad audience, I wouldn't necessarily jump into HTML 5 yet. It's still not supported widely or consistently enough to rely on it. However, there are several resources available if you want to give it a shot.
When Can I Use... should be a big help. It shows which features of HTML 5 are supported in which browsers fairly clearly. It would probably be good to research further about each tag you plan on using. Learn how the major browsers have implemented the tags, and if there's any quirks or bare-bones implementations that might be an obstacle to the average user.
I've heard Modernizr listed as a means of leveraging HTML 5 elements while maintaining backwards support for old browsers. Do note that I can't testify personally to how well it performs, having never used it before.

Website Usability Testing Procedures [closed]

Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 12 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm looking at this service: http://www.intuitionhq.com It's great, but it requires the user to opt in to the test. I'd like to find a service that I can just embed some javascript on the page and wherever a user clicks is recorded so I can find out what's most popular on what page. Does anyone know of something like that?
I'm one of the folks from IntuitionHQ - just thought I'd drop in on this. As you say, we don't currently have that functionality, but we are always on the lookout for popular features, and I'll be sure to put another check mark next to this one on our list.
For what you are describing now Mouseflow sounds like it might do the trick, so perhaps check that out. And keep us in mind for when you want to test some different designs, or if you want to compare two designs with each other (as we also do A/B testing).
Good luck with your testing, and if you have any further questions, please do ask.
Cheers,
Jacob from IntuitionHQ.

HTML5 notifications [closed]

Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
Is anyone using HTML5 notifications in practice, and is there any value in doing so? From my understanding it's limited only to Chrome, and so I can't imagine people jumping on this thing.
Google's now using them in Gmail. I think it'll prove popular and other sites will start running Chrome-only notifications. Then it will get implemented into WebKit so that Safari has it also. Then Firefox will do an implementation and I suspect eventually it'll get standardized.
If it's not hard to support (and it doesn't look to be), then I'd do it. You'll delight the users that have Chrome without adversely affecting the experience for the rest of the users.
Because Google is pushing to make this a W3 html5 standard.