Nottingham, Nottingham… Wagamama!!
Went to Nottingham
Went to Wagamama!!!!!
Thanks to the #nott crowd who were in the area and came, I’m sure we bemused the staff quite a bit, but we did seem to have a good time (or was that just the sake?)
Well, I had a good time anyway. It was also nice to see Ellie again, and to see Graham’s photos from Germany, although when I got back I found my CD of them had arrived. Very good effort on the presentation for those Graham, when I finally get around to doing mine you can guarentee that they’ll be at least that fancy.
I was wondering about those actually - I could do it much more easily if I relied on people having client-side XSLT support in their web browsers, but that means people need IE6 or IE5 with the MSHTML stuff installed, or Mozilla/Mozilla Firebird/Konqueror (and possibly Safari, I shall have to check).
Maybe if I just put Mozilla Firebird on the CD that’ll be enough… Anyone who’s likely to get one of these CDs, comments please? What versions of IE or other browsers are you using?
And why aren’t you using Mozilla Firebird????
I use IE 6, Opera 7 and Mozilla Firebird. I would use Firebird much more often if it had some of the crap that IE has meaning it start quicker. My churn rate for browser windows is phenominal - hundreds if not thousands per day - and Firebird takes a second or two longer to load which annoys slightly. It’s no where near as bad as Mozilla full, and I’m sure it’ll get better in future versions.
Comment by Nigel — Friday, 15th August 2003 @ 19:14
The crap in IE is because it’s the same program as the desktop shell… are you thinking of getting Firebird to replace that?
Mozilla has some fast startup preloading stuff in it, so maybe Mozilla Firebird will copy that eventually, but you may find using browser tabs is faster than opening new windows (note that’s a ‘may’ rather than a ‘will’. No guarantees)
Comment by MaW — Friday, 15th August 2003 @ 19:45
I know why IE has all the stuff and I don’t expect, or want Firebird to replace the shell, but the fact that IE is already resident in memory, IME, makes it load faster. I have noticed that Firebird is slightly faster opening a window if it’s already loaded.
Comment by Nigel — Saturday, 16th August 2003 @ 12:28
Hmm, well even if IE is fast, how long do you have to wait until you can upgrade to Windows Longhorn and get the new version? Microsoft are shooting themselves in the foot doing that.
Well, I hope they are anyway!
Although it would be nice if IE got proper PNG transparency support Right Now, because then we could actually start using it without excluding 90-odd percent of the potential audience.
Comment by MaW — Saturday, 16th August 2003 @ 14:12
I’ve been using Firebird for sometime - and like it
Although I noticed while making the cd that Firebird doesn’t seem to implement the css property background-color for tags… Hopefully they’ll get that sorted in a later release!
Glad you enjoyed the cd
Comment by Graham — Sunday, 17th August 2003 @ 13:25
Which tags doesn’t it implement it for? I’ve never had a problem with it with any other Gecko-based browsers.
Comment by MaW — Sunday, 17th August 2003 @ 14:26
It didn’t seem to work for tags. It may be that I typed something wrong in the css file (which, since it was the first time I’ve used css, is quite likely!)
Comment by Graham — Monday, 18th August 2003 @ 19:01
Hmm… I’ll try that again with some extra punctuation so MoveableType doesn’t process what I’m writing as html…
cough
It didn’t seem to work for tags
Comment by Graham — Monday, 18th August 2003 @ 19:04
Doh! Insert a link tag between “for” and “tags” in all of my above messages and things will make a lot more sense!
Comment by Graham — Monday, 18th August 2003 @ 19:07
Yes, don’t use HTML here, all comments are going through MT::Textile which does fancy-pants formatting. As you can see by the emergence of bold text in your comment above. It’s the same formatting thing I use for the comments themselves, and you can see the command set by following the link on the about the site page.
Now things make a lot more sense, yes… but why do you want to use background-color on anchor tags?
Comment by MaW — Monday, 18th August 2003 @ 19:31