Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
New HTML and CSS Features in Safari 3.1
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
cool. so i guess it might be worth updating soon (restart required). i'm learning HTML and CSS in my java class now too (well, having to really teach myself)
The spinney thing is fun
I wonder when firefox will support it....probably not until version 4 because HTML 5 is only in the draft stage.
The only issue is that it puts in red letters "link test failed". Firefox 3 beta 4 doesn't do that....though it gets a lower score.
As a designer I can honestly say that this is a revolution.
As other browsers take on these features designing for the web is going to become a real joy - it will take on the same layout principles as print and the freedom of font use and subtle/fluid animation without the use of flash replacement is going to open a lot of new creative doors...
As other browsers take on these features designing for the web is going to become a real joy - it will take on the same layout principles as print and the freedom of font use and subtle/fluid animation without the use of flash replacement is going to open a lot of new creative doors...
You totally misunderstood Foxglove9's point. IMHO, many websites did look quite nice 10 years ago. Many also looked quite nice 15 years ago. Not only did they look nice, Mosaic and the other GUI-based browsers of the day had acceptable performance over 9600 baud dialup lines. But, that is not the test. The purpose of the Web is to share information. The competent web designer does not allow his design to get in the way of the information that is being shared. The proficient designer uses available HTML features to enhance the user experience, not to be the user experience.
How about fixing the damn copy/paste issues with blogger.com rich text form where the text appears in a box at the bottom of the window rather than inside the rich text box:
Whoa, that's awesome! Hope the rest of the browsers implement this stuff down the line so that people will actually start using it.
It's probably much much snappier -- and snappiness is everything. And the implementation through CSS is extremely intuitive; imagine, instead of telling a div to animate from one place to another, and having to keep track of it and monitor if it is already animating to prevent conflicting animations, and so on and so forth and such like, you just tell it its new position. It's like Core Animation for the web. And, as for the transforms, I don't think script.aculo.us can do that (granted, I'm having trouble figuring out a true valid use for transforms... the gimmicky rotation thing is throwing me off...).
Here's a useful feature I would like:
How about the ability to close a JavaScript alert box with an actual "CLOSE BUTTON!" So one of these.
This would be way more convenient than a force-quit for the times I encounter sites that insist I have a virus, or that my computer is about to splode. Sites that only wish to rape my user info or set their site as my default homepage. If Safari blocks these things -- which it probably does -- I don't care to test.
I just want a close button, it's that simple.
*Rambles*
The font feature is nice, but as usual, its support is inconsistent across browsers/platforms. I'm also not sure what to think about this color management feature.
<]=)
How about the ability to close a JavaScript alert box with an actual "CLOSE BUTTON!" So one of these.
This would be way more convenient than a force-quit for the times I encounter sites that insist I have a virus, or that my computer is about to splode. Sites that only wish to rape my user info or set their site as my default homepage. If Safari blocks these things -- which it probably does -- I don't care to test.
I just want a close button, it's that simple.
*Rambles*
The font feature is nice, but as usual, its support is inconsistent across browsers/platforms. I'm also not sure what to think about this color management feature.
<]=)
so dose all this cool new stuff make safari snappier?
Yes.
But it still isn't as fast as the WebKit Nightly (though, that makes sense, seeing as the WebKit Nightly is by definition newer (and buggier)).
Because it's a standard maintained by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), not some person trying to collect money via PayPal to buy beer!
I clicked the link for Apple under the who uses it and I go to one of Apple's pages for Aperture? I click on the Digg link and I go to a regular Digg page. Do either of those pages use this technology? The whole site looks sketchy to me.
WebKit Nightly currently gets 92, so this is getting better. I find it interesting how Apple is releasing the newer WebKit builds more often. I think they are trying to become an even bigger player in the web arena (Safari being the most standards-compliant browser out there (at least, as far as I'm aware) already puts them as a big player, and the iPhone sure helps as well...).
They are trying to do what Microsoft used to do around the time of IE 4 and 5 -- invent newer and newer techniques (like Microsoft's filters, etc.). Of course, Apple's doing it with a lot more class:
microsoft said:style='filter
//assuming I got my math right and understand MS's docs...
apple said:
Also notice how Apple's never uses the word "Apple"? Rather, the word "webkit", which is the name of a cross-platform open-source layout engine.
Apple's Aperture site did use it... and I just checked and it still does on this page:
http://www.apple.com/aperture/features/
Look for this line:
HTML:
<script src="http://images.apple.com/global/scripts/lib/scriptaculous.js" type="text/javascript" charset="utf-8"></script>okay, how do you get the webkit safari??? Is it really that much better?? Will the average person see a difference??
