| Groups | Blog | Home |
asp.net webcontrols : MS_POSITIONING="flowlayout"
I'm just wondering about something. I have been using gridlayout for my project, but was recently told why flowlayout would be best (for my project anyway). So, I went into the HTML and changed my MS_POSITIONING to flowlayout, but the auto sizes, locations, and positions are still there for my controls. I've saved it, closed and re-opened it, etc and none of this has worked. Know what I mean? The body tag still says <body bgColor="powderblue" MS_POSITIONING="flowlayout"> so I'm not sure why the sizes, positions, locations, etc are still showing up in my HTML. Any ideas? TIA! -Kelly
Thanks, Scott!
PS. I changed my code to what you suggested (re: datagrids) yesterday and it works great! -Kelly [quoted text, click to view] "Scott M." <s-mar@nospam.nospam> wrote in message news:u9LR8mQyEHA.260@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl... > Items that you have already placed on the form will not be affected by the > change of this setting. You must change their positions for them to conform > to the new setting. Any new controls you add will conform to the new > setting. > > "Kelly" <kelly.hauser@amerock.com> wrote in message > news:et%23PKfQyEHA.1404@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl... > > Hi all - > > > > I'm just wondering about something. I have been using gridlayout for my > > project, but was recently told why flowlayout would be best (for my > > project > > anyway). So, I went into the HTML and changed my MS_POSITIONING to > > flowlayout, but the auto sizes, locations, and positions are still there > > for > > my controls. I've saved it, closed and re-opened it, etc and none of this > > has worked. > > > > Know what I mean? > > > > The body tag still says > > <body bgColor="powderblue" MS_POSITIONING="flowlayout"> > > > > so I'm not sure why the sizes, positions, locations, etc are still showing > > up in my HTML. > > > > Any ideas? > > > > TIA! > > -Kelly > > > > > >
Items that you have already placed on the form will not be affected by the
change of this setting. You must change their positions for them to conform to the new setting. Any new controls you add will conform to the new setting. [quoted text, click to view] "Kelly" <kelly.hauser@amerock.com> wrote in message news:et%23PKfQyEHA.1404@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl... > Hi all - > > I'm just wondering about something. I have been using gridlayout for my > project, but was recently told why flowlayout would be best (for my > project > anyway). So, I went into the HTML and changed my MS_POSITIONING to > flowlayout, but the auto sizes, locations, and positions are still there > for > my controls. I've saved it, closed and re-opened it, etc and none of this > has worked. > > Know what I mean? > > The body tag still says > <body bgColor="powderblue" MS_POSITIONING="flowlayout"> > > so I'm not sure why the sizes, positions, locations, etc are still showing > up in my HTML. > > Any ideas? > > TIA! > -Kelly > >
[quoted text, click to view]
>but was recently told why flowlayout would be best (for my project Rubbish! Who told you so?> anyway) (that's actually what i was thinking, to put it politely) Many uninformed developers rooted in ASP and HTML programming champion flowmode while disparaging designmode. I'm sure you aren't one of them by the way. -- Regards, Alvin Bruney [ASP.NET MVP http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/default.aspx] Got tidbits? Get it here... http://tinyurl.com/27cok [quoted text, click to view] "Kelly" <kelly.hauser@amerock.com> wrote in message news:et%23PKfQyEHA.1404@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl... > Hi all - > > I'm just wondering about something. I have been using gridlayout for my > project, but was recently told why flowlayout would be best (for my > project > anyway). So, I went into the HTML and changed my MS_POSITIONING to > flowlayout, but the auto sizes, locations, and positions are still there > for > my controls. I've saved it, closed and re-opened it, etc and none of this > has worked. > > Know what I mean? > > The body tag still says > <body bgColor="powderblue" MS_POSITIONING="flowlayout"> > > so I'm not sure why the sizes, positions, locations, etc are still showing > up in my HTML. > > Any ideas? > > TIA! > -Kelly > >
We are talking about FlowLayout vs. GridLayout, not flowmode vs. designmode
(2 different sets of things). GridLayout (IMO) is definitely NOT the way to build up a UI. GridLayout simply uses CSS Level 2 to absolutely position elements on the page. Now there are exceptions to every rule, but I have never advocated building the whole UI with absolutely positioned elements since when developing for the Internet, we don't know the resolution and monitor sizes of the client. Not to mention that absolute positioning is more difficult to design the layout of the page with since it requires knowing the exact pixel sizes of everything on the page. FlowLayout, by contrast allows us to simply drop a table of a certain width on that page and work within that width boundary. Now, getting back to the exception for every rule....If I have something I need to absolutely position, I can still do it for that one control without switching the entire page into GridLayout. [quoted text, click to view] "Alvin Bruney [MVP]" <vapor at steaming post office> wrote in message news:%230uncsQyEHA.3808@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl... > >but was recently told why flowlayout would be best (for my project >> anyway) > Rubbish! Who told you so? > (that's actually what i was thinking, to put it politely) > > Many uninformed developers rooted in ASP and HTML programming champion > flowmode while disparaging designmode. I'm sure you aren't one of them by > the way. > > -- > Regards, > Alvin Bruney > [ASP.NET MVP http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/default.aspx] > Got tidbits? Get it here... http://tinyurl.com/27cok > "Kelly" <kelly.hauser@amerock.com> wrote in message > news:et%23PKfQyEHA.1404@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl... >> Hi all - >> >> I'm just wondering about something. I have been using gridlayout for my >> project, but was recently told why flowlayout would be best (for my >> project >> anyway). So, I went into the HTML and changed my MS_POSITIONING to >> flowlayout, but the auto sizes, locations, and positions are still there >> for >> my controls. I've saved it, closed and re-opened it, etc and none of this >> has worked. >> >> Know what I mean? >> >> The body tag still says >> <body bgColor="powderblue" MS_POSITIONING="flowlayout"> >> >> so I'm not sure why the sizes, positions, locations, etc are still >> showing >> up in my HTML. >> >> Any ideas? >> >> TIA! >> -Kelly >> >> > >
Oh, and by the way, I would consider myself an extremely well informed
developer with many many years of practical experience. :) [quoted text, click to view] "Alvin Bruney [MVP]" <vapor at steaming post office> wrote in message news:%230uncsQyEHA.3808@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl... > >but was recently told why flowlayout would be best (for my project >> anyway) > Rubbish! Who told you so? > (that's actually what i was thinking, to put it politely) > > Many uninformed developers rooted in ASP and HTML programming champion > flowmode while disparaging designmode. I'm sure you aren't one of them by > the way. > > -- > Regards, > Alvin Bruney > [ASP.NET MVP http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/default.aspx] > Got tidbits? Get it here... http://tinyurl.com/27cok > "Kelly" <kelly.hauser@amerock.com> wrote in message > news:et%23PKfQyEHA.1404@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl... >> Hi all - >> >> I'm just wondering about something. I have been using gridlayout for my >> project, but was recently told why flowlayout would be best (for my >> project >> anyway). So, I went into the HTML and changed my MS_POSITIONING to >> flowlayout, but the auto sizes, locations, and positions are still there >> for >> my controls. I've saved it, closed and re-opened it, etc and none of this >> has worked. >> >> Know what I mean? >> >> The body tag still says >> <body bgColor="powderblue" MS_POSITIONING="flowlayout"> >> >> so I'm not sure why the sizes, positions, locations, etc are still >> showing >> up in my HTML. >> >> Any ideas? >> >> TIA! >> -Kelly >> >> > >
[quoted text, click to view]
> Oh, and by the way, I would consider myself an extremely well informed I'm not, i will graduate this year and start looking for work in the real > developer with many many years of practical > experience. :) world for the first time. I was paying enough attention to catch your implication that experienced developers use flow! -- Regards, Alvin Bruney [ASP.NET MVP http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/default.aspx] Got tidbits? Get it here... http://tinyurl.com/27cok [quoted text, click to view] "Scott M." <s-mar@nospam.nospam> wrote in message news:%23n3%23%23SRyEHA.2568@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl... > Oh, and by the way, I would consider myself an extremely well informed > developer with many many years of practical > experience. :) > > > > "Alvin Bruney [MVP]" <vapor at steaming post office> wrote in message > news:%230uncsQyEHA.3808@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl... >> >but was recently told why flowlayout would be best (for my project >>> anyway) >> Rubbish! Who told you so? >> (that's actually what i was thinking, to put it politely) >> >> Many uninformed developers rooted in ASP and HTML programming champion >> flowmode while disparaging designmode. I'm sure you aren't one of them by >> the way. >> >> -- >> Regards, >> Alvin Bruney >> [ASP.NET MVP http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/default.aspx] >> Got tidbits? Get it here... http://tinyurl.com/27cok >> "Kelly" <kelly.hauser@amerock.com> wrote in message >> news:et%23PKfQyEHA.1404@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl... >>> Hi all - >>> >>> I'm just wondering about something. I have been using gridlayout for my >>> project, but was recently told why flowlayout would be best (for my >>> project >>> anyway). So, I went into the HTML and changed my MS_POSITIONING to >>> flowlayout, but the auto sizes, locations, and positions are still there >>> for >>> my controls. I've saved it, closed and re-opened it, etc and none of >>> this >>> has worked. >>> >>> Know what I mean? >>> >>> The body tag still says >>> <body bgColor="powderblue" MS_POSITIONING="flowlayout"> >>> >>> so I'm not sure why the sizes, positions, locations, etc are still >>> showing >>> up in my HTML. >>> >>> Any ideas? >>> >>> TIA! >>> -Kelly >>> >>> >> >> > >
I've spent countless hours arguing the EVILS of flow so i won't go over it
here - feel free to google for it. At the end of the day, nobody has changed sides.And it is a bitter debate. The default for whidbey is flow and i will be fighting tooth and nail to get it back to grid - the way it should be. [quoted text, click to view] >GridLayout is deceptively evil, That's what i mean by disparaging remarks. It's an option in the IDE, learn to use it properly. If it didn't have a bona fide use, it would not be included - it wouldn't even be the default in two released versions. That by itself should be meaningful in and of itself. * Why does the control I put beneath my DataGrid become covered up by my DataGrid when it has too many items? * My users are complaining because they have to horizontally scroll, how do I fix this? * I have a user with an older browser version, and the page looks like junk. What's wrong with ASP.NET, why won't it work for older browsers? All these concerns have extremely easy fixes that I trust you are imparting as a responsible and objective teacher. But you did hit the nail on the head. Windows programmers stick to grid, HTML and ASP programmers stick to flow. And there are very little backsliders. My take is that the web has evolved from simple web submission forms to complex applications that run in a browser - functionally equivalent to a windows application in a browser. For that type of programming, gridlayout is a must. For all other options, use gridlayout (that's not a typo either). -- Regards, Alvin Bruney [ASP.NET MVP http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/default.aspx] Got tidbits? Get it here... http://tinyurl.com/27cok [quoted text, click to view] "Scott M." <s-mar@nospam.nospam> wrote in message news:%23n3%23%23SRyEHA.2568@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl... > Oh, and by the way, I would consider myself an extremely well informed > developer with many many years of practical > experience. :) > > > > "Alvin Bruney [MVP]" <vapor at steaming post office> wrote in message > news:%230uncsQyEHA.3808@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl... >> >but was recently told why flowlayout would be best (for my project >>> anyway) >> Rubbish! Who told you so? >> (that's actually what i was thinking, to put it politely) >> >> Many uninformed developers rooted in ASP and HTML programming champion >> flowmode while disparaging designmode. I'm sure you aren't one of them by >> the way. >> >> -- >> Regards, >> Alvin Bruney >> [ASP.NET MVP http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/default.aspx] >> Got tidbits? Get it here... http://tinyurl.com/27cok >> "Kelly" <kelly.hauser@amerock.com> wrote in message >> news:et%23PKfQyEHA.1404@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl... >>> Hi all - >>> >>> I'm just wondering about something. I have been using gridlayout for my >>> project, but was recently told why flowlayout would be best (for my >>> project >>> anyway). So, I went into the HTML and changed my MS_POSITIONING to >>> flowlayout, but the auto sizes, locations, and positions are still there >>> for >>> my controls. I've saved it, closed and re-opened it, etc and none of >>> this >>> has worked. >>> >>> Know what I mean? >>> >>> The body tag still says >>> <body bgColor="powderblue" MS_POSITIONING="flowlayout"> >>> >>> so I'm not sure why the sizes, positions, locations, etc are still >>> showing >>> up in my HTML. >>> >>> Any ideas? >>> >>> TIA! >>> -Kelly >>> >>> >> >> > >
[quoted text, click to view]
>>GridLayout is deceptively evil, > That's what i mean by disparaging remarks. It's an option in the IDE, > learn to use it properly. Actually, you can only change it on a project by project basis. [quoted text, click to view] > If it didn't have a bona fide use, it would not be included - it wouldn't > even be the default in two released versions. > That by itself should be meaningful in and of itself. You mean in the same way that the validation controls only work in IE because the use the MS DHTML model, rather than the W3C DOM? [quoted text, click to view] > > * Why does the control I put beneath my DataGrid become covered up by > my DataGrid when it has too many items? > * My users are complaining because they have to horizontally scroll, > how do I fix this? > * I have a user with an older browser version, and the page looks like > junk. What's wrong with ASP.NET, why won't it work for older browsers? > > All these concerns have extremely easy fixes that I trust you are > imparting as a responsible and objective teacher. Yes, the fix is to use FlowLayout. [quoted text, click to view] > But you did hit the nail on the head. Windows programmers stick to grid, > HTML and ASP programmers stick to flow. And there are very little > backsliders. Actually, you couldn't be more wrong on this one. Most VS.NET newbies think that Grid vs. Flow layout is a .NET thing. Experience web developers know that is is an HTML vs. CSS Level 2 thing. Most of the experienced web developers I know, know to only use absolute positioning for an element here and an element there, not the whole UI. [quoted text, click to view] > > My take is that the web has evolved from simple web submission forms to > complex applications that run in a browser - functionally equivalent to a > windows application in a browser. > For that type of programming, gridlayout is a must. For all other options, > use gridlayout (that's not a typo either). Your assesment makes no sense! The web *was* where complex applications ran in a browser and it still is. Form submissions are not relevant to this discussion. [quoted text, click to view] > > -- > Regards, > Alvin Bruney > [ASP.NET MVP http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/default.aspx] > Got tidbits? Get it here... http://tinyurl.com/27cok > "Scott M." <s-mar@nospam.nospam> wrote in message > news:%23n3%23%23SRyEHA.2568@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl... >> Oh, and by the way, I would consider myself an extremely well informed >> developer with many many years of practical >> experience. :) >> >> >> >> "Alvin Bruney [MVP]" <vapor at steaming post office> wrote in message >> news:%230uncsQyEHA.3808@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl... >>> >but was recently told why flowlayout would be best (for my project >>>> anyway) >>> Rubbish! Who told you so? >>> (that's actually what i was thinking, to put it politely) >>> >>> Many uninformed developers rooted in ASP and HTML programming champion >>> flowmode while disparaging designmode. I'm sure you aren't one of them >>> by the way. >>> >>> -- >>> Regards, >>> Alvin Bruney >>> [ASP.NET MVP http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/default.aspx] >>> Got tidbits? Get it here... http://tinyurl.com/27cok >>> "Kelly" <kelly.hauser@amerock.com> wrote in message >>> news:et%23PKfQyEHA.1404@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl... >>>> Hi all - >>>> >>>> I'm just wondering about something. I have been using gridlayout for my >>>> project, but was recently told why flowlayout would be best (for my >>>> project >>>> anyway). So, I went into the HTML and changed my MS_POSITIONING to >>>> flowlayout, but the auto sizes, locations, and positions are still >>>> there for >>>> my controls. I've saved it, closed and re-opened it, etc and none of >>>> this >>>> has worked. >>>> >>>> Know what I mean? >>>> >>>> The body tag still says >>>> <body bgColor="powderblue" MS_POSITIONING="flowlayout"> >>>> >>>> so I'm not sure why the sizes, positions, locations, etc are still >>>> showing >>>> up in my HTML. >>>> >>>> Any ideas? >>>> >>>> TIA! >>>> -Kelly >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > >
[quoted text, click to view]
>This is all fine and good, but the point is my experience of people who are >proponents of Grid over Flow are those who don't have a firm grasp on >laying out a page without absolute positioning. You hit the nail on the head with this statement!! I own and operate an IT training company myself and have been teaching web development (as well as doing commercial web development) for over 10 years and completely agree that if you know and understand good page layout and page design (as well as understand the pitfalls of CSS Level 2), you would not use it for the complete page UI. Now, don't misunderstand me here, absolute positioning has its place, but that place isn't building the total UI using it.
I concur 100%. GridLayout is deceptively evil, and I wish Microsoft
hadn't made it the default in Visual Studio .NET 2002/2003. I teach about six ASP.NET courses during the course of the year, and the number one thing that developers coming from a WinForms background do is become wed to GridLayout. By the time they come to my class, some of the #1 questions are: * Why does the control I put beneath my DataGrid become covered up by my DataGrid when it has too many items? * My users are complaining because they have to horizontally scroll, how do I fix this? * I have a user with an older browser version, and the page looks like junk. What's wrong with ASP.NET, why won't it work for older browsers? etc., etc. Now, I believe once we have Longhorn with a significant marketshare, and the Web moves from the current HTML markup to a richer, UI-focused markup, then the GridLayout concept will work great, and be the de facto way to create Web pages. But with the current technologies, GridLayout causes more pain among new developers than not. -- Scott Mitchell mitchell@4guysfromrolla.com http://www.4GuysFromRolla.com
[quoted text, click to view]
>>GridLayout is deceptively evil, > > That's what i mean by disparaging remarks. It's an option in the IDE, learn > to use it properly. Just because something exists as an option, doesn't mean it isn't a feature that will cause more harm than good. [quoted text, click to view] > If it didn't have a bona fide use, it would not be included - it wouldn't > even be the default in two released versions. > That by itself should be meaningful in and of itself. Agreed, but there are things that cause more harm than good, regardless of if they are options. For example, Option Explicit does not need to be included in a VBScript/old school VB program, but should be, always, and shouldn't have to be added to be included, agreed? [quoted text, click to view] > * Why does the control I put beneath my DataGrid become covered up by > my DataGrid when it has too many items? > * My users are complaining because they have to horizontally scroll, > how do I fix this? > * I have a user with an older browser version, and the page looks like > junk. What's wrong with ASP.NET, why won't it work for older browsers? > > All these concerns have extremely easy fixes that I trust you are imparting > as a responsible and objective teacher. Naturally. I show them the workaround, and then encourage them to explore FlowLayout in more depth. With my students, I find that it's ignorance that makes them hesitant to switch. They come from a non-Web background, so they are not familiar with using <DIV>s, <table>s, or other HTML elements to position content. This is all fine and good, but the point is my experience of people who are proponents of Grid over Flow are those who don't have a firm grasp on laying out a page without absolute positioning. I believe in an earlier comment in this thread you mentioned you had some good reasons for using Grid over Flow, I'd be interested in hearing them. [quoted text, click to view] > My take is that the web has evolved from simple web submission forms to > complex applications that run in a browser - functionally equivalent to a > windows application in a browser. We're getting there, yes, but HTML is not going to be the markup to take us there, XAML will. So I agree that GridLayout will be very important in the future, but right now I find it to be substandard. [quoted text, click to view] > For that type of programming, gridlayout is a must. For all other options, > use gridlayout (that's not a typo either). I take it you are developing your Web apps on an intranet, where the browser is guaranteed? Do you still promote GridLayout when you know you'll have visitors who, for example, might be coming from 2nd world nations or universtities, where they might not be using the latest and greatest browsers? -- Scott Mitchell mitchell@4guysfromrolla.com http://www.4GuysFromRolla.com
[quoted text, click to view]
> I take it you are developing your Web apps on an intranet, where the > browser is guaranteed? Yes, i do develop on intranets where the browser is guaranteed IE. But that's because the application functionality that our customers require can only be found in IE browsers. [quoted text, click to view] >Do you still promote GridLayout when you know you'll have visitors who, for >example, might be coming from 2nd world nations or universtities, Yes. Because i know how to fix the cross browser formatting issues so i am not boxed in to using flowlayout. I am free to use whatever I want. At that moment, it is gridlayout. I am not talking off the top of my head. I am currently building an internet commerce site open to all browsers and I am running into brick walls with the front-end guy who is an HTML tables and flowmode oldschool guy exhibiting what i term as grid prejudice. I've downloaded 4 different browsers and set my default browser to firefox to conclusively prove to this guy that there are no cross compatibility issues, still he set in his ways. But i convinced his boss who allowed me to go ahead with my approach. The days of building a page with a whole bunch of HTML tables flowing all over the place is no longer necessary for cross browser compatibility. [quoted text, click to view] >where they might not be using the latest and greatest browsers? This is my position. If you are a customer who isn't running an up-level browser, I am not interested in your business. I'll concede that the only thing i've found that flow is good for is screen resolution issues. Now, the applications built with gridlayout mode we will be problematic for the visually impaired since their resolutions will cause a HUGE mess on screen. Also, users who are prone to adjust their browser text size to the extreme settings may be mildly affected by gridlayout. [quoted text, click to view] >For example, Option Explicit does not need to be included in a VBScript/old Agreed.>school VB program, but should be, always, and shouldn't have to be added to >be included, agreed? [quoted text, click to view] > you mentioned you had some good reasons for using Grid over Flow, I'd be My page is lighter, so it loads faster. Gridlayout co-ordinate calculations > interested in hearing them. is based on integer math. This is faster than loading extra tables, divs, and other html elements whose only purpose is screen layering. We do still have people using dial-up and our applications should cater to them. I know you have seen those pages with tables inside of tables inside of divs inside of tables... Have you stopped to consider how heavy that page is to load? -- Regards, Alvin Bruney [ASP.NET MVP http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/default.aspx] Got tidbits? Get it here... http://tinyurl.com/27cok [quoted text, click to view] "Scott Mitchell [MVP]" <mitchell@4guysfromrolla.com> wrote in message news:aQeld.41188$QJ3.28602@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com... >>>GridLayout is deceptively evil, >> >> That's what i mean by disparaging remarks. It's an option in the IDE, >> learn to use it properly. > > Just because something exists as an option, doesn't mean it isn't a > feature that will cause more harm than good. > >> If it didn't have a bona fide use, it would not be included - it wouldn't >> even be the default in two released versions. >> That by itself should be meaningful in and of itself. > > Agreed, but there are things that cause more harm than good, regardless of > if they are options. For example, Option Explicit does not need to be > included in a VBScript/old school VB program, but should be, always, and > shouldn't have to be added to be included, agreed? > >> * Why does the control I put beneath my DataGrid become covered up by >> my DataGrid when it has too many items? >> * My users are complaining because they have to horizontally scroll, >> how do I fix this? >> * I have a user with an older browser version, and the page looks like >> junk. What's wrong with ASP.NET, why won't it work for older browsers? >> >> All these concerns have extremely easy fixes that I trust you are >> imparting as a responsible and objective teacher. > > Naturally. I show them the workaround, and then encourage them to explore > FlowLayout in more depth. With my students, I find that it's ignorance > that makes them hesitant to switch. They come from a non-Web background, > so they are not familiar with using <DIV>s, <table>s, or other HTML > elements to position content. This is all fine and good, but the point is > my experience of people who are proponents of Grid over Flow are those who > don't have a firm grasp on laying out a page without absolute positioning. > I believe in an earlier comment in this thread you mentioned you had some > good reasons for using Grid over Flow, I'd be interested in hearing them. > >> My take is that the web has evolved from simple web submission forms to >> complex applications that run in a browser - functionally equivalent to a >> windows application in a browser. > > We're getting there, yes, but HTML is not going to be the markup to take > us there, XAML will. So I agree that GridLayout will be very important in > the future, but right now I find it to be substandard. > >> For that type of programming, gridlayout is a must. For all other >> options, use gridlayout (that's not a typo either). > > I take it you are developing your Web apps on an intranet, where the > browser is guaranteed? Do you still promote GridLayout when you know > you'll have visitors who, for example, might be coming from 2nd world > nations or universtities, where they might not be using the latest and > greatest browsers? > > > -- > > Scott Mitchell > mitchell@4guysfromrolla.com > http://www.4GuysFromRolla.com > > * When you think ASP.NET, think 4GuysFromRolla.com!
[quoted text, click to view]
>I own and operate an IT training company myself and have been teaching web I did not call your experience into question.>development (as well as doing commercial web development) for over 10 years [quoted text, click to view] >Now, don't misunderstand me here, absolute positioning has its place, but >that place isn't building the total UI using it. On the contrary, I prefer not to box myself in to using one approach when other approaches offer the same, or even added benefits. -- Regards, Alvin Bruney [ASP.NET MVP http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/default.aspx] Got tidbits? Get it here... http://tinyurl.com/27cok [quoted text, click to view] "Scott M." <s-mar@nospam.nospam> wrote in message news:uEAf1VTyEHA.2316@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl... > >This is all fine and good, but the point is my experience of people who > >are proponents of Grid over Flow are those who don't have a firm grasp on > >laying out a page without absolute positioning. > > You hit the nail on the head with this statement!! I own and operate an > IT training company myself and have been teaching web development (as well > as doing commercial web development) for over 10 years and completely > agree that if you know and understand good page layout and page design (as > well as understand the pitfalls of CSS Level 2), you would not use it for > the complete page UI. Now, don't misunderstand me here, absolute > positioning has its place, but that place isn't building the total UI > using it. >
[quoted text, click to view]
>You mean in the same way that the validation controls only work in IE Well, now that is a Microsoft implementation issue right?>because the use the MS DHTML model, rather than the W3C DOM? [quoted text, click to view] > Yes, the fix is to use FlowLayout. That is only one solution. The other solution is to adjust the web config file so it renders the correct HTML to all browsers. You do realize that this cross browser issue was exacerbated by Microsoft's poor implementation of the HTML rendering process - a situation that is remedied in whidbey - right? [quoted text, click to view] > Most of the experienced web developers I know, know to only use absolute Yes, and most windows programmers who have moved to the web know it the > positioning for an element here and an element there, not the whole UI. other way around. You aren't going to discredit them by imposing your own agenda right? Like it or not, windows programmers are moving to the web in droves - that is the impetus behind .NET. My position is that they are free to use whatever tools they think can get the job done on budget and on schedule and within the bounds of customer satisfaction. If that means using flowlayout, then by all means, flow. If it means using gridlayout, then grid. Notice that i do not force my gridlayout position compared to your forcing flowlayout, i simply leave it as an option because impositions always tend to stifle creativity and slow forward movement. -- Regards, Alvin Bruney [ASP.NET MVP http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/default.aspx] Got tidbits? Get it here... http://tinyurl.com/27cok [quoted text, click to view] "Scott M." <s-mar@nospam.nospam> wrote in message news:uxsZpTTyEHA.2316@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl... >>>GridLayout is deceptively evil, >> That's what i mean by disparaging remarks. It's an option in the IDE, >> learn to use it properly. > > Actually, you can only change it on a project by project basis. > >> If it didn't have a bona fide use, it would not be included - it wouldn't >> even be the default in two released versions. >> That by itself should be meaningful in and of itself. > > You mean in the same way that the validation controls only work in IE > because the use the MS DHTML model, rather than the W3C DOM? > >> >> * Why does the control I put beneath my DataGrid become covered up by >> my DataGrid when it has too many items? >> * My users are complaining because they have to horizontally scroll, >> how do I fix this? >> * I have a user with an older browser version, and the page looks like >> junk. What's wrong with ASP.NET, why won't it work for older browsers? >> >> All these concerns have extremely easy fixes that I trust you are >> imparting as a responsible and objective teacher. > > Yes, the fix is to use FlowLayout. > >> But you did hit the nail on the head. Windows programmers stick to grid, >> HTML and ASP programmers stick to flow. And there are very little >> backsliders. > > Actually, you couldn't be more wrong on this one. Most VS.NET newbies > think that Grid vs. Flow layout is a .NET thing. Experience web > developers know that is is an HTML vs. CSS Level 2 thing. Most of the > experienced web developers I know, know to only use absolute positioning > for an element here and an element there, not the whole UI. > >> >> My take is that the web has evolved from simple web submission forms to >> complex applications that run in a browser - functionally equivalent to a >> windows application in a browser. >> For that type of programming, gridlayout is a must. For all other >> options, use gridlayout (that's not a typo either). > > Your assesment makes no sense! The web *was* where complex applications > ran in a browser and it still is. Form submissions are not relevant to > this discussion. > >> >> -- >> Regards, >> Alvin Bruney >> [ASP.NET MVP http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/default.aspx] >> Got tidbits? Get it here... http://tinyurl.com/27cok >> "Scott M." <s-mar@nospam.nospam> wrote in message >> news:%23n3%23%23SRyEHA.2568@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl... >>> Oh, and by the way, I would consider myself an extremely well informed >>> developer with many many years of practical >>> experience. :) >>> >>> >>> >>> "Alvin Bruney [MVP]" <vapor at steaming post office> wrote in message >>> news:%230uncsQyEHA.3808@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl... >>>> >but was recently told why flowlayout would be best (for my project >>>>> anyway) >>>> Rubbish! Who told you so? >>>> (that's actually what i was thinking, to put it politely) >>>> >>>> Many uninformed developers rooted in ASP and HTML programming champion >>>> flowmode while disparaging designmode. I'm sure you aren't one of them >>>> by the way. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Regards, >>>> Alvin Bruney >>>> [ASP.NET MVP http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/default.aspx] >>>> Got tidbits? Get it here... http://tinyurl.com/27cok >>>> "Kelly" <kelly.hauser@amerock.com> wrote in message >>>> news:et%23PKfQyEHA.1404@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl... >>>>> Hi all - >>>>> >>>>> I'm just wondering about something. I have been using gridlayout for >>>>> my >>>>> project, but was recently told why flowlayout would be best (for my >>>>> project >>>>> anyway). So, I went into the HTML and changed my MS_POSITIONING to >>>>> flowlayout, but the auto sizes, locations, and positions are still >>>>> there for >>>>> my controls. I've saved it, closed and re-opened it, etc and none of >>>>> this >>>>> has worked. >>>>> >>>>> Know what I mean? >>>>> >>>>> The body tag still says >>>>> <body bgColor="powderblue" MS_POSITIONING="flowlayout"> >>>>> >>>>> so I'm not sure why the sizes, positions, locations, etc are still >>>>> showing >>>>> up in my HTML. >>>>> >>>>> Any ideas? >>>>> >>>>> TIA! >>>>> -Kelly >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > >
[quoted text, click to view]
> I did not call your experience into question. I never said you did. [quoted text, click to view] >>Now, don't misunderstand me here, absolute positioning has its place, but >>that place isn't building the total UI using it. > > On the contrary, I prefer not to box myself in to using one approach when > other approaches > offer the same, or even added benefits. Then you should consider the approach I'm describing... FlowLayout for most of the page, Absolute Positioning when needed. Using GridLayout for everything actually limits the end result possibilities.
[quoted text, click to view] >>I'll concede that the only thing i've found that flow is good for is >>screen >>resolution issues. Now, the applications built with gridlayout mode >>we will be problematic for the visually impaired since their resolutions >>will cause a HUGE mess on screen. Also, users who are prone to >>adjust their browser text size to the extreme settings may be mildly >>affected by gridlayout. This has been my point all along and is why FlowLayout is the better choice. The only situation where GridLayout wouldn't cause the issues above is where the monitor size, screen resolution and browser options are locked down. That is pretty rare. Even in corporate intranets, the monitor size and screen resolutions vary.
[quoted text, click to view] "Alvin Bruney [MVP]" <vapor at steaming post office> wrote in message news:O%23JmPfZyEHA.2676@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl... > >You mean in the same way that the validation controls only work in IE > >because the use the MS DHTML model, rather than the W3C DOM? > Well, now that is a Microsoft implementation issue right? You said if the feature was there, it must have value. Validation controls are there, but they have no client-side value if you aren't using MS IE. So, just because a feature is there, doesn't make it the best choice to use. [quoted text, click to view] >> Yes, the fix is to use FlowLayout. > That is only one solution. The other solution is to adjust the web config > file so it renders the correct HTML to all browsers. > You do realize that this cross browser issue was exacerbated by > Microsoft's poor implementation > of the HTML rendering process - a situation that is remedied in whidbey - > right? It's not a cross-browser issue at all. It's a screen resolution and browser text size setting issue. You do realize that right (rhetorical question since you've agreed to this is a previous post in this thread)? [quoted text, click to view] >> Most of the experienced web developers I know, know to only use absolute >> positioning for an element here and an element there, not the whole UI. > Yes, and most windows programmers who have moved to the web know it the > other way around. > You aren't going to discredit them by imposing your own agenda right? Like > it or not, windows programmers are moving to the web in droves - that is > the impetus behind .NET. These were not my comments in the first place so I have nothing to add here. You have confused the posts of Scott Mitchell with me: Scott M. (not the same Scott). [quoted text, click to view] > My position is that they are free to use whatever tools they think can get > the job done on > budget and on schedule and within the bounds of customer satisfaction. > If that means using flowlayout, then by all means, flow. If it means using > gridlayout, then grid. > > Notice that i do not force my gridlayout position compared to your forcing > flowlayout, i simply leave it as an option because impositions > always tend to stifle creativity and slow forward movement. Well, you've been pretty adamant that GridLayout is the way to go. On the other hand, I have said that there is a place for absolute positioning. My comments have nothing to do with .NET (since this isn't a .NET issue) and have everything to do with good UI design. Because monitor size, resolution size and text size can't be known for the client, GridLayout is very dangerous to use. That's not an opinion, it is a fact (and you've agreed in an earlier post in this thread). Given that information, how can you seriously say that building the whole UI in GridLayout is the better approach for most UI development?!
[quoted text, click to view]
> an earlier post in this thread). Given that information, how can you > seriously say that building the whole UI in GridLayout is the better > approach for most UI development?! Never did say that. I said it was an option. You argue it should be used here and there. But your argument is not convincing. The large majority of desktops run a standard size screen resolution with just a few clients running outside that range. So using that as an argument to justify flowlayout doesn't cut it. The vast majority of desktops use 800x600 thru 1280x1024. Gridlayout works just fine in these modes. So build your applications with that setting in mind and test for that resolution range. That is why internet sites sometimes have a recommended resolution setting. I have used GridLayout for ALL my UI development in the few days that I have been developing web applications. I have not had any problems with different browsers or resolution settings that I could not quickly adjust in code. I build web applications that compete for and replace windows desktop applications. These customers require their interface to look and behave exactly like a windows application in form and function. If they shrink the browser size for instance, they don't want to see a server control flow to the next line. It doesn't do that in windows desktop and that is exactly their expectation. Until these customer requirements change, that is what i will be giving the customer. It's their money and their product. You have to take all that into consideration before you go blindly saying that FlowLayout is the best for most UI development because different problem domains require different options. -- Regards, Alvin Bruney [ASP.NET MVP http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/default.aspx] Got tidbits? Get it here... http://tinyurl.com/27cok [quoted text, click to view] "Scott M." <s-mar@nospam.nospam> wrote in message news:%231ukf7ayEHA.2624@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl... > > "Alvin Bruney [MVP]" <vapor at steaming post office> wrote in message > news:O%23JmPfZyEHA.2676@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl... >> >You mean in the same way that the validation controls only work in IE >> >because the use the MS DHTML model, rather than the W3C DOM? > >> Well, now that is a Microsoft implementation issue right? > > You said if the feature was there, it must have value. Validation > controls are there, but they have no client-side value if you aren't using > MS IE. So, just because a feature is there, doesn't make it the best > choice to use. > >>> Yes, the fix is to use FlowLayout. >> That is only one solution. The other solution is to adjust the web config >> file so it renders the correct HTML to all browsers. >> You do realize that this cross browser issue was exacerbated by >> Microsoft's poor implementation >> of the HTML rendering process - a situation that is remedied in whidbey - >> right? > > It's not a cross-browser issue at all. It's a screen resolution and > browser text size setting issue. You do realize that right (rhetorical > question since you've agreed to this is a previous post in this thread)? > > >>> Most of the experienced web developers I know, know to only use absolute >>> positioning for an element here and an element there, not the whole UI. >> Yes, and most windows programmers who have moved to the web know it the >> other way around. > >> You aren't going to discredit them by imposing your own agenda right? >> Like it or not, windows programmers are moving to the web in droves - >> that is the impetus behind .NET. > > These were not my comments in the first place so I have nothing to add > here. You have confused the posts of Scott Mitchell with me: Scott M. (not > the same Scott). > >> My position is that they are free to use whatever tools they think can >> get the job done on >> budget and on schedule and within the bounds of customer satisfaction. >> If that means using flowlayout, then by all means, flow. If it means >> using gridlayout, then grid. >> >> Notice that i do not force my gridlayout position compared to your >> forcing flowlayout, i simply leave it as an option because impositions >> always tend to stifle creativity and slow forward movement. > > Well, you've been pretty adamant that GridLayout is the way to go. On the > other hand, I have said that there is a place for absolute positioning. > My comments have nothing to do with .NET (since this isn't a .NET issue) > and have everything to do with good UI design. Because monitor size, > resolution size and text size can't be known for the client, GridLayout is > very dangerous to use. That's not an opinion, it is a fact (and you've > agreed in an earlier post in this thread). Given that information, how > can you seriously say that building the whole UI in GridLayout is the > better approach for most UI development?! >
[quoted text, click to view] "Alvin Bruney [MVP]" <vapor at steaming post office> wrote in message news:etLRZtcyEHA.4004@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl... >> an earlier post in this thread). Given that information, how can you >> seriously say that building the whole UI in GridLayout is the better >> approach for most UI development?! > > Never did say that. I said it was an option. You argue it should be used > here and there. Actually, you DID say that (you said the following): "I'll concede that the only thing i've found that flow is good for is screen resolution issues. Now, the applications built with gridlayout mode we will be problematic for the visually impaired since their resolutions will cause a HUGE mess on screen. Also, users who are prone to adjust their browser text size to the extreme settings may be mildly affected by gridlayout." ....And guess what? These issues (resolution & text size) are applicable to absolutely EVERY web application built. They are not exceptions to the rule, they are the rule. [quoted text, click to view] > But your argument is not convincing. The large majority of desktops run a > standard size screen resolution with just > a few clients running outside that range. So using that as an argument to > justify flowlayout doesn't cut it. Wow are you mis-informed! LOL [quoted text, click to view] > The vast majority of desktops use 800x600 thru 1280x1024. Gridlayout works > just fine in these modes. > So build your applications with that setting in mind and test for that > resolution range. 800x600 thru 1280x1024 is a range. What you build (using GridLayout) for one resolution will look very different in another. You don't build for a range, you build for a specific resolution. That is how you approximate a client application. Also, you can't really say that GridLayout works in one mode or another...GridLayout works in ANY mode, the problem is when you are in a different mode than the one that the app was designed for (which is the whole point). [quoted text, click to view] > That is why internet sites sometimes have a recommended resolution > setting. The popularity of that idea stopped about 5 years ago. Very few sites today require a user to change their resolution to meet the UI. Again, this is the whole point. As UI's have become more complex and technology has given us more UI choices, we no longer need to have the user meet us, we can meet the user. [quoted text, click to view] > I have used GridLayout for ALL my UI development in the few days that I > have been developing web applications. What?!! You've only been doing web application work for a few days?!!! OMG!!! Why are we even having this conversation then? You are putting up positions that have been tried and tested for many years (by the web community and myself as well) and basically telling us all that in the "few days" that you have been doing web development you've somehow figured out that we're wrong!? [quoted text, click to view] > I have not had any problems with different browsers or resolution settings > that I could not quickly adjust in code. > I build web applications that compete for and replace windows desktop > applications. > These customers require their interface to look and behave exactly like a > windows application in form This has nothing to do with our conversation. [quoted text, click to view] > and function. If they shrink the browser size for instance, they don't > want to see a server control flow to the next line. Who says that this will happen using FlowLayout mode?! A control wrapping to the next line down is not a Grid vs. Flow issue at all. It's a matter of knowing how to code HTML properly. [quoted text, click to view] > It doesn't do that in windows desktop and that is exactly their > expectation. Again, this is irrelevant since it doesn't happen in FlowLayout mode either. [quoted text, click to view] > Until these > customer requirements change, that is what i will be giving the customer. > It's their money and their product. And the sure do want to make sure that EVERYONE who uses their application will experience the EXACT same UI. The GridLayout solution won't do that, a properly designed FlowLayout will. [quoted text, click to view] > You have to take all that into consideration before you go blindly saying > that FlowLayout is the best for most > UI development because different problem domains require different > options. Alvin, it is clear to me that you have very limited knowledge of HTML and very limited experience in correctly testing the UI layer of a web application. That's a dangerous place to be in if you want to defend a position. If you had that experience it would be clear as day to you that everything you have been saying is hogwash. You keep bringing up your customer's wants and needs and how I am "blindly" saying that FlowLayout is the way to go. The truth is that GridLayout causes problems that must be overcome and FlowLayout prevents those problems in the first place. So, they both can be used to accomplish the goal, BUT FlowLayout will get you there faster and with less problems along the way. I've also said that absolute positioning of particular controls here and there (CSS Level 2), not to be confused with GridLayout mode (where ALL page content is absolutely positioned using CSS Level 2) can be useful (when used properly). Of course you are entitled to your opinion and if you can get the job done with GridLayout then "more power to you", but you may want to listen to the advice of those who have been doing this for a decade or so and can clearly look at both sides of this coin. You may even find that by taking some advice, your job gets easier and your customers are happier.
****For that type of
[quoted text, click to view] > programming, gridlayout is a must. For all other options, use gridlayout > (that's not a typo either).****" I guess you couldn't see the humor there either. If you had stopped to consider the statement within the context of what i said, it would have been clear that there was humor involved. Permit me to re-iterate my point. Both Grid and Flow are valid. ASP and HTML programmers disparage Grid while touting flow. That's wrong on all accounts. Use the best tool for the job. Would you disagree with that? -- Regards, Alvin Bruney [ASP.NET MVP http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/default.aspx] Got tidbits? Get it here... http://tinyurl.com/27cok [quoted text, click to view] "Scott Mitchell [MVP]" <mitchell@4guysfromrolla.com> wrote in message news:wuwld.41505$QJ3.13076@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com... > Alvin Bruney [MVP] wrote: >>>an earlier post in this thread). Given that information, how can you >>>seriously say that building the whole UI in GridLayout is the better >>>approach for most UI development?! >> >> >> Never did say that. > > I believe you said exactly this, no? To quote: > > "My take is that the web has evolved from simple web submission forms to > complex applications that run in a browser - functionally equivalent to a > windows application in a browser. ****For that type of programming, > gridlayout is a must. For all other options, use gridlayout (that's not a > typo either).****" > > > -- > > Scott Mitchell > mitchell@4guysfromrolla.com > http://www.4GuysFromRolla.com > > * When you think ASP.NET, think 4GuysFromRolla.com!
[quoted text, click to view]
>You don't build for a range, you build for a specific resolution. No. You build for a range, and you test for a range otherwise you force your users to run the app for the specific setting. You can't force me to run an app in 800x600 just because that was the only resolution you wrote your app to handle. I'm sure that isn't you argument. It absolutely can't be. [quoted text, click to view] > us more UI choices, we no longer need to have the user meet us, we can You just said you don't build apps for resolution ranges. You build for a > meet the user. specific resolution so exactly which user are you meeting? [quoted text, click to view] > What?!! You've only been doing web application work for a few days?!!! I don't see why you should bother call my expertise into question. It has no relevance here. If i make a point, you cannot disregard it based on whether i am a student or 20 year veteran. Instead, discredit it based on the content of the matter and how i frame the argument. Name calling gets you no where in here. But it does show what position you are arguing from. [quoted text, click to view] > This has nothing to do with our conversation. sure it does. Customers drive business. That's the bottom line.[quoted text, click to view] > Who says that this will happen using FlowLayout mode?! A control wrapping Are you serious? You are suggesting that I start coding in HTML to fix this > to the next line down is not a Grid vs. Flow issue at all. It's a matter > of knowing how to code HTML properly. issue? Take a moment to drop two controls on a webform, alternate the layouts and resize the browser. I guess you can hide behind the fact that everything boils down to HTML in a browser but you would be missing the whole point of the argument. [quoted text, click to view] > Again, this is irrelevant since it doesn't happen in FlowLayout mode What? You are using humor right?> either. [quoted text, click to view] > Alvin, it is clear to me that you have very limited knowledge of HTML and Name calling? You know i avoid these arguments because they are without > very limited experience in correctly testing the UI layer of a web > application. merit. Please learn that even a student or a carpenter can make a point in a public forum and you should have the decency to only discredit based on the content of the argument. I could very easily claim that I am a 20 year veteran, a student or a TRAINER who owns his own school!. I am neither by the way (but how can you tell?) I get sick to my stomach when people like you think that who you are is important when framing an argument. I am expecting an apology by the way, for the name calling. [quoted text, click to view] > BUT FlowLayout will get you there faster and with less problems along the you haven't supported that position thus far with anything but name calling.> way. [quoted text, click to view] > with GridLayout then "more power to you", but you may want to listen to That's what its about? You need recognition for your years of development > the advice of those who have been doing this for a decade or so experience? I don't. I learn from students and veterans alike. The source of the knowledge is not important to me. But the knowledge is. Anyway, it is clear you have degenerated an otherwise spirited discussion into name calling. And that's turning me off. You need to apologize and learn to keep it clean. You could end up working for me someday. -- Regards, Alvin Bruney [ASP.NET MVP http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/default.aspx] Got tidbits? Get it here... http://tinyurl.com/27cok [quoted text, click to view] "Scott M." <s-mar@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
news:O%23GSMJdyEHA.3416@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl... > > "Alvin Bruney [MVP]" <vapor at steaming post office> wrote in message > news:etLRZtcyEHA.4004@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl... >>> an earlier post in this thread). Given that information, how can you >>> seriously say that building the whole UI in GridLayout is the better >>> approach for most UI development?! >> >> Never did say that. I said it was an option. You argue it should be used >> here and there. > > Actually, you DID say that (you said the following): > > "I'll concede that the only thing i've found that flow is good for is > screen > resolution issues. Now, the applications built with gridlayout mode > we will be problematic for the visually impaired since their resolutions > will cause a HUGE mess on screen. Also, users who are prone to > adjust their browser text size to the extreme settings may be mildly > affected by gridlayout." > > ...And guess what? These issues (resolution & text size) are applicable > to absolutely EVERY web application built. They are not exceptions to the > rule, they are the rule. > >> But your argument is not convincing. The large majority of desktops run a >> standard size screen resolution with just >> a few clients running outside that range. So using that as an argument to >> justify flowlayout doesn't cut it. > > Wow are you mis-informed! LOL > >> The vast majority of desktops use 800x600 thru 1280x1024. Gridlayout >> works just fine in these modes. >> So build your applications with that setting in mind and test for that >> resolution range. > > 800x600 thru 1280x1024 is a range. What you build (using GridLayout) for > one resolution will look very different in another. That is how you > approximate a client application. Also, you can't really say that > GridLayout works in one mode or another...GridLayout works in ANY mode, > the problem is when you are in a different mode than the one that the app > was designed for (which is the whole point). > >> That is why internet sites sometimes have a recommended resolution >> setting. > > The popularity of that idea stopped about 5 years ago. Very few sites > today require a user to change their resolution to meet the UI. Again, > this is the whole point. As UI's have become more complex and technology > has given us more UI choices, we no longer need to have the user meet us, > we can meet the user. > >> I have used GridLayout for ALL my UI development in the few days that I >> have been developing web applications. > > What?!! You've only been doing web application work for a few days?!!! > OMG!!! Why are we even having this conversation then? You are putting up > positions that have been tried and tested for many years (by the web > community and myself as well) and basically telling us all that in the > "few days" that you have been doing web development you've somehow figured > out that we're wrong!? > >> I have not had any problems with different browsers or resolution >> settings that I could not quickly adjust in code. > >> I build web applications that compete for and replace windows desktop >> applications. >> These customers require their interface to look and behave exactly like a >> windows application in form > > This has nothing to do with our conversation. > >> and function. If they shrink the browser size for instance, they don't
[quoted text, click to view] "Alvin Bruney [MVP]" <vapor at steaming post office> wrote in message news:OdxRTEeyEHA.3120@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl... > >You don't build for a range, you build for a specific resolution. > > No. You build for a range, and you test for a range otherwise you force > your users to run the app for the specific setting. > You can't force me to run an app in 800x600 just because that was the only > resolution you wrote your app to handle. I absolutly can and its done everyday. Go to abc.com, cbs.com, nbc.com or virtually any other major web site. It was built for 800 x 600 regardless of what your particular setting is. I'll go one step further than that, look at the source code for all these sites and search the code for <TABLE>. You'll find that this is how they are all built, not by absolutly positioning everything. [quoted text, click to view] > I'm sure that isn't you argument. It absolutely can't be. It can be if you know something about developing a web UI. Go to cnn.com or msnbc.com or any other major web site with your screen resolution set at 800 x 600 and you'll see that the UI was built specifically for that setting. Change your setting to 1024 x 768 and you'll see that the page stays the same but you now have extra white space on the right edge. The site wasn't built for a range of resolutions, it was built for a specific resolution. This is my point. It is just obvious that you don't have any experience with this if you don't see that. [quoted text, click to view] > >> us more UI choices, we no longer need to have the user meet us, we can >> meet the user. > You just said you don't build apps for resolution ranges. You build for a > specific resolution so exactly which user are you meeting? The one that is the target of my application OR (as mentioned above) I can build one UI that dynamicly adjusts for any resolution. [quoted text, click to view] > >> What?!! You've only been doing web application work for a few days?!!! > I don't see why you should bother call my expertise into question. It has > no relevance here. > If i make a point, you cannot disregard it based on whether i am a student > or > 20 year veteran. Instead, discredit it based on the content of the matter > and how i frame the argument. I have done that. I've given you point by point descriptions of why Grid is bad and Flow is good, but you've turned a deaf ear on all of the experience and expertise of those who have struggled with this issue before you. You've just responded with one basic point that says that you've built applications that are supposed to look like a Windows application. You haven't addressed the facts about the use of that application..That's just ignorance. [quoted text, click to view] > Name calling gets you no where in here. > But it does show what position you are arguing from. I am not trying to get anywhere "in here" and I never called you any names. I said you are inexperienced and by your own admission, this is a fact, not an insult. I said that your argument was hogwash. That's also not name calling. It is a statment about your lack of knowledge (another fact) in this area. I am trying to give you some very good advice based on years actual experiences using both tecniques that we have discussed. I've been clear as to what the issues are and you've already conceded that I'm right, but then dismissed these issues and proclaimed that you were right anyway....That tells me that you are stubborn and aren't really interested in developing your skills. [quoted text, click to view] >> This has nothing to do with our conversation. > sure it does. Customers drive business. That's the bottom line. LOL. And applications that don't work for the clients of those customers generally don't get the developers of those applications more work. It IS irrelevant what your app does or who you are building it for. If you are building web pages, then they need to render in a browser on a monitor. What's relevant is that we can't control what browser that will be and what resolution that will be, so we build applications that ensure that they will render the SAME in all environments. Now read this next part carefully...GridLayout is not capable of doing that. It's not and that is a fact. If you dispute this point, then you really don't have any idea of how web UI rendering works. [quoted text, click to view] >> Who says that this will happen using FlowLayout mode?! A control >> wrapping to the next line down is not a Grid vs. Flow issue at all. It's >> a matter of knowing how to code HTML properly. > Are you serious? You are suggesting that I start coding in HTML to fix > this issue? Are YOU serious? Do you not realize that the basis for EVERY web page is HTML? Do you really believe that you can be a good web developer and not know or work with HTML? [quoted text, click to view] > Take a moment to drop two controls on a webform, alternate the layouts and > resize > the browser. I guess you can hide behind the fact that everything boils > down > to HTML in a browser but you would be missing the whole point of the > argument. I have no idea what point you are even trying to make with your exercise here. If you are trying to take us back to your "controls will wrap when the browser is resized" point from earlier, then I'll repeat what I said earlier. This is not a layout issue it is a fundamental issue of knowing how to write good HTML. You call this "hiding" behind the FACT that everything boils down to HTML. And, you say that this is missing the point, but this is the EXACT point. [quoted text, click to view] > >> Again, this is irrelevant since it doesn't happen in FlowLayout mode >> either. > What? You are using humor right? No, I'm talking about something that I guess you haven't learned how to control in HTML. [quoted text, click to view] > >> Alvin, it is clear to me that you have very limited knowledge of HTML and >> very limited experience in correctly testing the UI layer of a web >> application. > Name calling? You know i avoid these arguments because they are without > merit. What name did I call you? No, I stated (by your own admission) a FACT. You have limited experience with the technologies you are trying to educate us on. [quoted text, click to view] > Please learn that even a student or a carpenter can make a point in a > public forum and you should have the decency to only discredit based on > the content of the argument. You should have the presence of mind to be able to separate an insult from a fact that you may not like to hear. Having little experience in an area is not an insult or a name. You are also posting in a public forum that is frequented mostly by folks that have much more experise and experience in this area as you. What do you expect someone to tell you when they have the knowledge and experience in this matter and they know you are mistaken? And what would you make of someone who adamantly defends a position widely known
[quoted text, click to view]
Alvin Bruney [MVP] wrote: >>where they might not be using the latest and greatest browsers? > > This is my position. If you are a customer who isn't running an up-level > browser, I am not interested in your business. Eep. So do you have a big message on your page, "ALL PEOPLE WHO CAN'T AFFORD THE LATEST TECHNOLOGY, AND MILLIONS OF PEOPLE SUFFERING FROM VISUAL IMPAIRMENT - GO AWAY!" I can't imagine that is good for the bottom line. -- Scott Mitchell mitchell@4guysfromrolla.com http://www.4GuysFromRolla.com
[quoted text, click to view]
Alvin Bruney [MVP] wrote: >>an earlier post in this thread). Given that information, how can you >>seriously say that building the whole UI in GridLayout is the better >>approach for most UI development?! > > > Never did say that. I believe you said exactly this, no? To quote: "My take is that the web has evolved from simple web submission forms to complex applications that run in a browser - functionally equivalent to a windows application in a browser. ****For that type of programming, gridlayout is a must. For all other options, use gridlayout (that's not a typo either).****" -- Scott Mitchell mitchell@4guysfromrolla.com http://www.4GuysFromRolla.com
[quoted text, click to view]
> Permit me to re-iterate my point. > Both Grid and Flow are valid. ASP and HTML programmers disparage Grid while > touting flow. That's wrong on all accounts. Use the best tool for the job. > Would you disagree with that? I wouldn't disagree with that, no, but let's look at your first reply in this post: [quoted text, click to view] >> ... but was recently told why flowlayout would be best >> ***(for my project anyway)*** > > Rubbish! Who told you so? (emphasis mine) If Flow layout has its place, as you agree, then why would you have the foresight to tell him "rubish" when our original poster noted that flow layout would be best for his project? (Assuming you knew nothing about his project, which I take is the case, unless you personally know the original poster or have communicated with him about this project beforehand.) In any event, this whole thread basically boiled down to a flamewar. I doubt we'll be able to influence one another's firm beliefs. My belief is aligned with Scott M.'s, that FlowLayout is best and, where absolute positioning is needed, it can be employed. Personally I think having GridLayout be the default was a mistake on MS's part, since (in my experience) it causes desktop application developers more troubles than it's worth, and typically they do not even know about FlowLayout! -- Scott Mitchell mitchell@4guysfromrolla.com http://www.4GuysFromRolla.com
[quoted text, click to view]
> If Flow layout has its place, as you agree, then why would you have the > foresight to tell him "rubish" when our original poster noted that flow > layout would be best for his project? What i was getting at was that a certain class of developers discredit gridlayout without reason and out of prejudice. I wasn't sure if that was why OP was told to use flow over grid or if there was actual merit to using flow. [quoted text, click to view] >Personally I think having GridLayout be the default was a mistake on MS's >part, since (in my experience) it causes desktop application developers >more troubles than it's worth, and typically they do not even know about >FlowLayout! I believe they do know about it. They choose not to use it. I've found that those who choose grid over flow are typically windows programmers who have moved to the web. ASP and HTML programmers stick with flowlayout. Hence the war. The default for whidbey was made flowlayout simply because a large number of programmers from the other side of the fence complained rather loudly about it - not because it worked better than gridlayout. The issue is clearly divisive, but each option does have its merit. I guess that is our only common ground. -- Regards, Alvin Bruney [ASP.NET MVP http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/default.aspx] Got tidbits? Get it here... http://tinyurl.com/27cok [quoted text, click to view] "Scott Mitchell [MVP]" <mitchell@4guysfromrolla.com> wrote in message news:jOzld.41535$QJ3.21782@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com... >> Permit me to re-iterate my point. >> Both Grid and Flow are valid. ASP and HTML programmers disparage Grid >> while touting flow. That's wrong on all accounts. Use the best tool for >> the job. Would you disagree with that? > > I wouldn't disagree with that, no, but let's look at your first reply in > this post: > > >> ... but was recently told why flowlayout would be best > >> ***(for my project anyway)*** > > > > Rubbish! Who told you so? > > (emphasis mine) > > If Flow layout has its place, as you agree, then why would you have the > foresight to tell him "rubish" when our original poster noted that flow > layout would be best for his project? (Assuming you knew nothing about > his project, which I take is the case, unless you personally know the > original poster or have communicated with him about this project > beforehand.) > > In any event, this whole thread basically boiled down to a flamewar. I > doubt we'll be able to influence one another's firm beliefs. My belief is > aligned with Scott M.'s, that FlowLayout is best and, where absolute > positioning is needed, it can be employed. Personally I think having > GridLayout be the default was a mistake on MS's part, since (in my > experience) it causes desktop application developers more troubles than > it's worth, and typically they do not even know about FlowLayout! > > -- > > Scott Mitchell > mitchell@4guysfromrolla.com > http://www.4GuysFromRolla.com > > * When you think ASP.NET, think 4GuysFromRolla.com!
[quoted text, click to view]
> What i was getting at was that a certain class of developers discredit > gridlayout without reason and out of prejudice. > I wasn't sure if that was why OP was told to use flow over grid or if > there was actual merit to using flow. Alvin, that is your opinion and is based, not in fact, but in your perception. The reason that ASP and HTML developers (collectively known as web developers) suggest FlowLayout is because their EXPERIENCE WITH WEB DEVELOPMENT tells them that Grid causes problems and Flow is better. It isn't prejudice and we're not dismissing Grid without giving it any thought. It is based on our collective EXPERIENCE using the two choices (GridLayout is not a .NET thing and we've had the ability to work with it for many years now). What part of this don't you get? [quoted text, click to view] > >>Personally I think having GridLayout be the default was a mistake on MS's >>part, since (in my experience) it causes desktop application developers >>more troubles than it's worth, and typically they do not even know about >>FlowLayout! > > I believe they do know about it. They choose not to use it. I've found > that those who choose grid over flow are typically > windows programmers who have moved to the web. ASP and HTML programmers > stick with flowlayout. Hence the war. See above. Windows developers see GridLayout because iit is the default and they don't know any better. Web developers know better. Any other former Windows developer I've come across starts out liking Grid because it makes them feel like they are working the same way as when they did Windows apps. But, as soon as they begin to understand the unique UI issues that come up in web development, they dump Grid and can see the value of Flow. There is no "war" as you have said. In all honestly YOU are the only person I've come across (and I have worked with thousands of former client developers) that seems to want to fight about this. [quoted text, click to view] > The default for whidbey was made flowlayout simply because a large number > of programmers from the other side of the fence > complained rather loudly about it - not because it worked better than > gridlayout. On what basis do you say that? What study have you seen? What statistics are you quoting from? This has been your problem all along. You make these "pronouncments" about why something is a certain way with no knowledge or experience in what you are talking about. I wish you could hear how foolish you sound spouting out these rediculous statements that are not based in anything but your desire to have them be true. [quoted text, click to view] > The issue is clearly divisive, but each option does have its merit. > I guess that is our only common ground. It's only divisive with you. By the way, I'm just curious here. You say you are an ASP.NET MVP? How did that happen when you have no practical experience in web development and know very little about HTML? [quoted text, click to view] > > -- > Regards, > Alvin Bruney > [ASP.NET MVP http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/default.aspx] > Got tidbits? Get it here... http://tinyurl.com/27cok > "Scott Mitchell [MVP]" <mitchell@4guysfromrolla.com> wrote in message > news:jOzld.41535$QJ3.21782@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com... >>> Permit me to re-iterate my point. >>> Both Grid and Flow are valid. ASP and HTML programmers disparage Grid >>> while touting flow. That's wrong on all accounts. Use the best tool for >>> the job. Would you disagree with that? >> >> I wouldn't disagree with that, no, but let's look at your first reply in >> this post: >> >> >> ... but was recently told why flowlayout would be best >> >> ***(for my project anyway)*** >> > >> > Rubbish! Who told you so? >> >> (emphasis mine) >> >> If Flow layout has its place, as you agree, then why would you have the >> foresight to tell him "rubish" when our original poster noted that flow >> layout would be best for his project? (Assuming you knew nothing about >> his project, which I take is the case, unless you personally know the >> original poster or have communicated with him about this project >> beforehand.) >> >> In any event, this whole thread basically boiled down to a flamewar. I >> doubt we'll be able to influence one another's firm beliefs. My belief >> is aligned with Scott M.'s, that FlowLayout is best and, where absolute >> positioning is needed, it can be employed. Personally I think having >> GridLayout be the default was a mistake on MS's part, since (in my >> experience) it causes desktop application developers more troubles than >> it's worth, and typically they do not even know about FlowLayout! >> >> -- >> >> Scott Mitchell >> mitchell@4guysfromrolla.com >> http://www.4GuysFromRolla.com >> >> * When you think ASP.NET, think 4GuysFromRolla.com! > >
I do an annual talk on .NET at a local university so my experience comes from interacting with this group. I cannot say with certainty that their choice is due to the influence of a teacher or their personal preference, or knowledge/lack of the feature. I wouldn't be willing to hazard a guess at this point because I don't teach a class so I have no way of probing the reasons for their decision. -- Regards, Alvin Bruney [ASP.NET MVP http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/default.aspx] Got tidbits? Get it here... http://tinyurl.com/27cok [quoted text, click to view] "Scott Mitchell [MVP]" <mitchell@4guysfromrolla.com> wrote in message news:w8Old.21320$6q2.19878@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com... > Alvin Bruney [MVP] wrote: >>>Personally I think having GridLayout be the default was a mistake on MS's >>>part, since (in my experience) it causes desktop application developers >>>more troubles than it's worth, and typically they do not even know about >>>FlowLayout! >> >> I believe they do know about it. They choose not to use it. > > And as I said in earlier messages in this thread, that has not been my > experience with the students I |