<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Well it works on my machine</title>
	<atom:link href="http://selfmademinds.com/200705/well-it-works-on-my-machine/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://selfmademinds.com/200705/well-it-works-on-my-machine/</link>
	<description>Sharing lessons learned in business and online marketing</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 06 Oct 2008 19:00:56 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Sean</title>
		<link>http://selfmademinds.com/200705/well-it-works-on-my-machine/#comment-1210</link>
		<dc:creator>Sean</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 May 2007 12:04:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://selfmademinds.com/200705/well-it-works-on-my-machine/#comment-1210</guid>
		<description>Interesting article. I especially liked your struck through comment about designers who go AWOL. As a web hoster &#38; developer, I consider the statement to be neither harsh nor inaccurate. The prevalence of designers either not being available, or, worse still, giving you major attitude when they consider themselves to have finished with you, is probably what has lead to the increase in popularity of content management systems. A couple of years ago, if you mentioned CMS, you were met with disapproving stares. They were clunky and more than a little confusing, requiring a large helping of tech-savviness to produce anything worthwhile. Now, with offerings from Joomla!, Drupal, and Mambo, CM for the masses is rapidly becoming a reality. I consider Joomla! to be the best of these, with the basic installation being extremely customizable, especially with thousands of templates being available for look and feel. To tie this in with your article, although the basic installs of these CMS's is very well validated across all browsers, the plethora of third party templates on offer has resulted in, in some cases, sites not validating across all browsers. IE, mainly 5 and 6, seems to be the biggest culprit, especially in terms of CSS.  The problem is probably exacerbated by the fact that a design must be validated on, at least, the three most recent versions of IE, since, as you rightly pointed out, IE users, as a whole, are the least technically inclined, and, therefore, the most likely to still be using older versions of the browser. Thankfully, IE 7 seems to have addressed many of the CSS validation issues that had designers gnashing teeth in their quest for W3C compliance.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting article. I especially liked your struck through comment about designers who go AWOL. As a web hoster &amp; developer, I consider the statement to be neither harsh nor inaccurate. The prevalence of designers either not being available, or, worse still, giving you major attitude when they consider themselves to have finished with you, is probably what has lead to the increase in popularity of content management systems. A couple of years ago, if you mentioned CMS, you were met with disapproving stares. They were clunky and more than a little confusing, requiring a large helping of tech-savviness to produce anything worthwhile. Now, with offerings from Joomla!, Drupal, and Mambo, CM for the masses is rapidly becoming a reality. I consider Joomla! to be the best of these, with the basic installation being extremely customizable, especially with thousands of templates being available for look and feel. To tie this in with your article, although the basic installs of these CMS&#8217;s is very well validated across all browsers, the plethora of third party templates on offer has resulted in, in some cases, sites not validating across all browsers. IE, mainly 5 and 6, seems to be the biggest culprit, especially in terms of CSS.  The problem is probably exacerbated by the fact that a design must be validated on, at least, the three most recent versions of IE, since, as you rightly pointed out, IE users, as a whole, are the least technically inclined, and, therefore, the most likely to still be using older versions of the browser. Thankfully, IE 7 seems to have addressed many of the CSS validation issues that had designers gnashing teeth in their quest for W3C compliance.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Powerful posts 20 May 2007 &#187; Community Building Blog</title>
		<link>http://selfmademinds.com/200705/well-it-works-on-my-machine/#comment-1201</link>
		<dc:creator>Powerful posts 20 May 2007 &#187; Community Building Blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 May 2007 13:42:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://selfmademinds.com/200705/well-it-works-on-my-machine/#comment-1201</guid>
		<description>[...] and more can all have a bearing on how your site looks to each visitor. In his article &#8216;Well it works on my machine&#8216;, Al reminds us just how varied individual setups can be and how this affects all site [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] and more can all have a bearing on how your site looks to each visitor. In his article &#8216;Well it works on my machine&#8216;, Al reminds us just how varied individual setups can be and how this affects all site [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: alek</title>
		<link>http://selfmademinds.com/200705/well-it-works-on-my-machine/#comment-1199</link>
		<dc:creator>alek</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 May 2007 02:59:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://selfmademinds.com/200705/well-it-works-on-my-machine/#comment-1199</guid>
		<description>Al,

Great writeup and yea, testing is a pain ... but necessary. One thing I didn't see you mention is did your HTML/CSS W3C validate? 

Note that this is *not* a sure-fire way to ensure it looks good in all browsers (as you know, IE has quirks!), but at least for me, I've found all sort of boo-boo's that might have otherwise slipped through.

alek</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Al,</p>
<p>Great writeup and yea, testing is a pain &#8230; but necessary. One thing I didn&#8217;t see you mention is did your HTML/CSS W3C validate? </p>
<p>Note that this is *not* a sure-fire way to ensure it looks good in all browsers (as you know, IE has quirks!), but at least for me, I&#8217;ve found all sort of boo-boo&#8217;s that might have otherwise slipped through.</p>
<p>alek</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Community Building Blog</title>
		<link>http://selfmademinds.com/200705/well-it-works-on-my-machine/#comment-1194</link>
		<dc:creator>Community Building Blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 May 2007 13:14:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://selfmademinds.com/200705/well-it-works-on-my-machine/#comment-1194</guid>
		<description>It can be all too easy to forget that your site will appear differently on different machines. I think it is important to reward those users who report problems to you - as you have done by linking to them in your article.

- Martin Reed</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It can be all too easy to forget that your site will appear differently on different machines. I think it is important to reward those users who report problems to you - as you have done by linking to them in your article.</p>
<p>- Martin Reed</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Al</title>
		<link>http://selfmademinds.com/200705/well-it-works-on-my-machine/#comment-1183</link>
		<dc:creator>Al</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 May 2007 16:35:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://selfmademinds.com/200705/well-it-works-on-my-machine/#comment-1183</guid>
		<description>That's a very valid point Richard and I totally agree. It was one of those that I thought would only take a few minutes (yeah right) which when combined with writing this post turned into a mornings work. Live and learn.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That&#8217;s a very valid point Richard and I totally agree. It was one of those that I thought would only take a few minutes (yeah right) which when combined with writing this post turned into a mornings work. Live and learn.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Richard</title>
		<link>http://selfmademinds.com/200705/well-it-works-on-my-machine/#comment-1177</link>
		<dc:creator>Richard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 May 2007 03:01:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://selfmademinds.com/200705/well-it-works-on-my-machine/#comment-1177</guid>
		<description>This is a good example of working IN the business and not ON the business.  If possible I would outsource this type of work.  The time spent debugging the site could have been used to formulate a new marketing plan or brainstorm a new site.

But when you new to this business it's hard to find a reputable developer to depend on.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is a good example of working IN the business and not ON the business.  If possible I would outsource this type of work.  The time spent debugging the site could have been used to formulate a new marketing plan or brainstorm a new site.</p>
<p>But when you new to this business it&#8217;s hard to find a reputable developer to depend on.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Business Blogger</title>
		<link>http://selfmademinds.com/200705/well-it-works-on-my-machine/#comment-1176</link>
		<dc:creator>Business Blogger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 May 2007 23:15:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://selfmademinds.com/200705/well-it-works-on-my-machine/#comment-1176</guid>
		<description>Thanks Al!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks Al!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: RovingCalypso</title>
		<link>http://selfmademinds.com/200705/well-it-works-on-my-machine/#comment-1173</link>
		<dc:creator>RovingCalypso</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 May 2007 18:36:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://selfmademinds.com/200705/well-it-works-on-my-machine/#comment-1173</guid>
		<description>A general rule is that if it works on IE, specifically IE6, it'll work on most of the other browsers (Firefox, Opera). 

A similar thing happened to a wordpress blog of mine. It was working A-OK on Firefox, but had major problems in IE.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A general rule is that if it works on IE, specifically IE6, it&#8217;ll work on most of the other browsers (Firefox, Opera). </p>
<p>A similar thing happened to a wordpress blog of mine. It was working A-OK on Firefox, but had major problems in IE.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tecwzrd</title>
		<link>http://selfmademinds.com/200705/well-it-works-on-my-machine/#comment-1172</link>
		<dc:creator>tecwzrd</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 May 2007 17:57:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://selfmademinds.com/200705/well-it-works-on-my-machine/#comment-1172</guid>
		<description>http://browsershots.org/ is another 20 browser checker with screen shots.

I've always used Dreamweaver for creating sites and Dreamweaver has a built in browser checker installed which shows how the page works (including plugins and forms) for each browser. I assume that most programs have this feature unless it's "free".</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://browsershots.org/" >http://browsershots.org/</a> is another 20 browser checker with screen shots.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve always used Dreamweaver for creating sites and Dreamweaver has a built in browser checker installed which shows how the page works (including plugins and forms) for each browser. I assume that most programs have this feature unless it&#8217;s &#8220;free&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Al</title>
		<link>http://selfmademinds.com/200705/well-it-works-on-my-machine/#comment-1170</link>
		<dc:creator>Al</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 May 2007 16:48:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://selfmademinds.com/200705/well-it-works-on-my-machine/#comment-1170</guid>
		<description>Nice conclusion Deano, so IE users have more tattoos whilst FF users drink more coffee. I rest my case.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice conclusion Deano, so IE users have more tattoos whilst FF users drink more coffee. I rest my case.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
