in which post number is the OP expressing this opinion?
Post #44
Yes, as gary said (and also guido)
Bts of CSS3 are gradually being picked up by browsers, but it’s mostly not finished yet so is not a solution for all browsers.
The jQuery/JavaScript solution is probably your only real option here, as the majority of users have JavaScript enabled. The code is very easy to set up, so if you need some help with it, just holler. You just have to place a few javascript links in the head of your document.
Post #44
ok, fair enough. there are too many posts in this thread and not enough time for me to go through and read each in fine detail.
but then, as I posted earlier you can still snake the content and not have to scroll vertically and any readability issues that might arise from that could also come up in any web page.
all I was posting was a description of 1 way to snake content from 1 column to another and the snaking wouldn’t necessarily have to involve having to scroll vertically to see all the content.
I definitely agree with you there, not trying to be contentious.
But even the OPs holy grail, the NY times reader app, shows long articles on multiple pages, each divvyed up into multiple columns.
You still have to scroll, it’s just not the zig zag type of scrolling as if it were several LONG (in the y direction) columns.
yep, no problem 
to be honest, I doubt the OP will be able to get away with not having to scroll vertically to the end of 1 column and then scroll back up to the top of the next column unless the articles are fairly short.
personally, as I posted in either this thread or the OP’s related thread to this project, I don’t mind scrolling vertically.
it’s only when that horizontal scroll bar appears in my browser (especially in this forum’s code blocks - but I digress and that is another issue :)) that I get annoyed and I just want to 
it :).
So in everyone’s expert (or not) opinion, how much do you risk relying on CSS3 at this point? That is to say, how many users will you close out?
If using CSS3 is like not programming for IE6 users then ta hell with that small subset. However if relying on CSS3 closes out like all WIndows users then that would be a problem.
The jQuery/JavaScript solution is probably your only real option here,
So is JavaScript the only client-side browser programming language out there?
as the majority of users have JavaScript enabled.
Related to my question above, how risky do you think it is to have a website that relies on JavaScript?
I know you say a majority of users have JavaScript enabled, but what does everyone else think?
The code is very easy to set up, so if you need some help with it, just holler. You just have to place a few javascript links in the head of your document.
The code for what?
Are you saying that to set up a webpage that has - say 3 columns - were the text snakes from column to column and where the user would never have to scroll vertically regardless of the size of their monitor/resolution/browser size?
If so, then I’d like to talk more!
Debbie
The general rule of thumb is: If it’s for a paying corporate client, then don’t rely on CSS3 for general functionality. You can always add progressive enhancement with it.
If using CSS3 is like not programming for IE6 users then ta hell with that small subset. However if relying on CSS3 closes out like all WIndows users then that would be a problem.
CSS3 is still in a spec, and all current implementations are with browser prefixes. IE is notoriously slow in updating to new CSS, so depending on the property, you will be closing it out to possibly all of IE (and possibly a significant portion of other browsers)
So is JavaScript the only client-side browser programming language out there?
There’s also Perlscript, VBScript, Shockwave (LOL) and some Java applets but I would stick with JS.
Related to my question above, how risky do you think it is to have a website that relies on JavaScript?
I know you say a majority of users have JavaScript enabled, but what does everyone else think?
As long as you are ONLY providing PROGRESSIVE enhancement with javascript, that’s fine. But you should be able to view your website with NO CSS, NO IMAGES, NO JS first and have it work. Then with CSS and Images, NO JS, and still have it work. Then with JS, and have it work the best.
The code for what?
Are you saying that to set up a webpage that has - say 3 columns - were the text snakes from column to column and where the user would never have to scroll vertically regardless of the size of their monitor/resolution/browser size?
If so, then I’d like to talk more!
Everyone here has agreed that you will have to make the user scroll vertically eventually. If the client has their browser at 100px, there is NO WAY to still read text legibly, and the user will have to scroll.
Accept this fact. Now. Before you do anything else. It’s inevitable, and will save you frustration.
Not Windows user as such, but just IE/ Opera users. IE users are still the majority, though, and IE9 won’t support CSS3 columns either, so this will not work well into the future.
So is JavaScript the only client-side browser programming language out there?
Well, the only one that gets talked about.
how risky do you think it is to have a website that relies on JavaScript?
You should never buil a site that relies on JS. But it’s fine to build one that’s enhanced by JS. So, those who have it turned on (which is the vast majority) they’ll see some columns, and those who have it off will see one wide column.
The code for what?
The code for the JavaScript column option. You made some comment about the code looking overwhelming.
Are you saying that to set up a webpage that has - say 3 columns - were the text snakes from column to column and where the user would never have to scroll vertically regardless of the size of their monitor/resolution/browser size?
Not sure if the scripts I linked to check the height of the browser, so you’d have to lok at the demos and check that. But they do the rest. I don’t see how you could avoid vertical scrolling on small windows, unless the content were made ridiculously small. You could set a fixed height, I guess, so that users on small screens had to scroll just the article as opposed to the whole page.
The web isn’t at a stage yet where it can be all things to all people.
I would say leave CSS 3 for what it is. It’s not just IE 6 you’re ruling out. About the Javascript solution, I would say go for it. I think you have made your point about having such a feature integrated
I guess using CSS3 excludes all IE users (not only IE6), and Opera users.
Statistics on browser usage and javascript:
http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp
If I remember well, these statistics are based on w3schools visitors, which aren’t exactly your average website visitors, so the real IE percentage might be much higher.
Edit: they say so themselves:
W3Schools is a website for people with an interest for web technologies. These people are more interested in using alternative browsers than the average user. The average user tends to use Internet Explorer, since it comes preinstalled with Windows. Most do not seek out other browsers.
These facts indicate that the browser figures above are not 100% realistic. Other web sites have statistics showing that Internet Explorer is used by at least 80% of the users.
Especially for commercial work I’m not even looking at css3, or even html5, until they become “officially” released by the W3C and then only after at least IE and FF fully support them.
so in summary, it’s probably not going to happen in my life time 
But remember that this is just ONE aggregate. Specific sites will have highly skewed browser statistics.
A website for web designers/developers/technies will likely have more modern browser versions and less IE users.
A website for retirement homes will likely still have IE6 users visiting.
Yes, I remembered when I hit the submit button 
Already edited my post.
I find the W3 statistics quite reliable. I don’t think they’re that far from the reality.
I thought so too, before I started in my latest job (at a huuuuge company).
Get to work, Windows XP on all computers, pre-installed with only IE7.
Thankfully, they haven’t restricted installation privileges. Still, I’m pretty sure I’m one of 3% of people in my entire site to have installed a different browser.
I know statistics are statistics but the numbers reflect quite reasonable what Is happening around me
yep agree :agree:
the total number of users for FF and IE combined at w3schools and netmarketshare are within a few percentage points of each other (although the actual split is different).
the percentages for Opera, Chrome and Safari are reasonably similar between the 2 sources.
The only reason I posted that link was to show that the IE marketshare is big enough not to consider CSS3 as a very valid solution, and also that around 5% of the w3schools visitors have JS disabled (in 2008), which probably is a lot lower in a non tech savvy crowd.
[ot]materialdesigner: “a huuuuge company… Windows XP on all computers, pre-installed with only IE7.”
I really don’t get why big companies have become the dead weights of the internet. I know they invest in certain platforms, but still…[/ot]