[FFmpeg-devel] ffmpeg.org clean up

[Diego Biurrun]

On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 12:32:35AM +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 11:19:37PM +0100, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 10:37:04PM +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > > On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 08:02:36PM +0100, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 10:37:57AM -0800, Mike Melanson wrote:
> > > > > Diego Biurrun wrote:
> > > > > > On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 10:16:38AM -0800, Mike Melanson wrote:
> > > > > >> Let me know of a plausible, cross-browser method to display 
> > > > > >> informational graphs (like performance vs. revision) in FATE using your 
> > > > > >> set of constraints. I'm still trying to solve that problem after a year.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Forget the cross-browser constraint.  Just make sure it follows the
> > > > > > relevant standards.  Browsers will eventually catch up, except maybe
> > > > > > IE, the use of which should be discouraged anyway.
> > > > > 
> > > > > So, adhere to standards that no one uses,
> > > > 
> > > > I beg your pardon?  The rendering engines of Firefox,  Safari and Opera
> > > > adhere closely to standards and even IE is catching up by leaps and
> > > > bounds.  This statement comes straight out of the 1990s...
> > > > 
> > > > > and that the biggest browser on the market does not care about?
> > > > 
> > > > In our "market" IE has a share of 23%, while Firefox has almost 50%.
> > > > 
> > > > http://natsuki.mplayerhq.hu/awstats/mplayerhq.hu/200812/awstats.mplayerhq.hu.browserdetail.html
> > > > 
> > > > Don't waste your time accomodating people that can fix their problems by
> > > > quickly downloading Firefox or upgrading their IE and make the world a
> > > > better place in the process.
> > > 
> > > > Back when I redesigned the MPlayer homepage I tried to make it work on
> > > > IE, but the pain was just too big and the code uglification too
> > > > enormous.
> > > 
> > > so even though the page doesnt work in IE correctly there still are 23%
> > > using IE?
> > 
> > Apparently.  Note that roughly half of them are using IE 7+, which
> > copes much better because it adheres more closely to web standards.
> 
> > And now let's define what "work" means here.  If you point your browser
> > to http://www.mplayerhq.hu/ you will notice the menu on the left.  Pass
> > your mouse pointer over it, you will see mouseover effects.  Entries get
> > highlighted, underlined or surrounded by a frame.
> 
> just tried
> menu is above the text and no effects with my mouse pointer over it, not
> that i expected any but the misplaced menu is serious incompetence on your
> side. And that is not a IE issue its a issue of the page being written so
> it will not display correctly on pre CSS browsers.

Text-mode browser or dillo?

At some point I replaced the divs by a table-based layout, but I went
back to the divs.  It's much cleaner and it's not my fault that text
mode browsers and dillo have not catched up with the 1990s yet.

Besides, apart from the fact that they account for <0.05% of the users
of the page, the site *is* functional, you just have to scroll past the
menu...

Also note that the alternative is javascript.  You of all people should
abhor the idea of running code on your browser just to highlight a link
or field...

> [...]
> > > > We have no customers to scare away and no external requests to satisfy.
> > > > Just do the right thing, let the IE-using lamers feel the pain.  They
> > > > will switch browsers or upgrade if it is improtant to them.
> > > > 
> > > > I really don't know why you even want to bother...
> > > 
> > > let me as project leader say it once, hard and simple
> > > if whoever designs the webpage knowingly designs it in a way that doesnt work
> > > on a major browser. That is for example using a feature that is known not to
> > > be supported on a major browser in way that is mandatory to view the page,
> > > then i will replace that person by someone else who has the competence to
> > > write plain html 3.2/4.0 without weird features.
> > 
> > I think it's a very bad idea to help Microsoft and IE hold back the web.
> 
> I think its bad to violate antitrust laws and intentionally design pages
> to work just with your buddie companies browsers.
> there is no difference if that be FOSS browsers or MS-EULA or some limit
> to signed binaries done by apple i-"toys". Its the same thing.

I don't design web pages with just my buddy company's browser.  As I
said, even Firefox did not render it 100% in the beginning.  I design
with standards in mind.  It pays off in the long run.

Have you ever tried to make a web design work in cross-browser fashion?

Diego