Re: rawhide firefox and background colour of webpages (CSS broken?)

[Rodd Clarkson <rodd clarkson id au>]

On Mon, 2005-01-31 at 19:26 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Hi
> 
> > Yes. But it isn't mandatory. They are broken, but they only look broken in
> > firefox fc3 - so people believe that firefox is broken.
> 
> it isnt mandatory. it is just a good design issue. firefox doesnt
> emulate IE quirks perfectly either. people believe firefox is broken
> on those IE specific websites too. thats a user education problem.
> 
> > And yes, i do also remember that Mosaic had a gray background. 10 years ago.
> > 
> > So, please, please set the *default* settings so that most pages doesn't
> > look broken.

> if this is going to be done, change the gnome system colors on the
> whole to reflect this inorder to be consistent

Actually, a web browser is a little like getting a ream of paper.  While
you can get paper in a range of colors, when you ask your mate to grab a
ream of paper when he's at the office supplies, you expect him to come
back with a ream of 'white' paper, and almost all your documents are set
up for white paper unless you particularly wanted a different color.

The same thing should happen with web-browsers.  User's expect a white
background.  Hell, a lot of bad web designers expect a white background.

It might be worth asking the mozilla guys why the default background
color changed from grey to white.  I suspect that it had something to do
with the fact that most users just went and changed the color to white
because the grey was annoying (they expected white).


Rodd

-- 
>From the pain come the dream
>From the dream come the vision
>From the vision come the people
>From the people come the power
>From this power come the change

                         - Peter Gabriel