Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

why would any developer who didnt want to lose their job use this? There are lots of things you can do that you shouldn't. So what I can do with one background image and 2-3 divs and look good, you can do with a series of bold tags to look bad. Sorry to be critical, but this is not the quality of content I have come to expect from HN. Digg maybe.


I've never hit a CSS rounded corners solution that met all my requirements:

* No image files (Extra HTTP requests/inflexible to colour changes)

* No extra markup (All the benefits of a clean DOM)

* Cross-browser without relying on parsing bugs (Supporting user choice is good)

* No pixel-based measurements (Visual designs should scale to different browser text sizes and screen resolutions)

Given that, any solution will involve some trade-offs. To me, some non-semantic HTML is a reasonable sacrifice since it is transparent to most users.


Its code hacking, a part of what hackers do. If it was actually Digg material, it would have been on the Digg frontpage by now.


because hackers like to do things with less work. creating images means work. the code does look long though. it should probably be abstracted into a server-side view helper function.


Less work in this case = horrible results. You're ruining the semantics of the DOM to use a crappy method for creating rounded corners. Want to create a fluid box with rounded corners and even less work? Use Javascript. You're not writing crappy HTML and it's even less work; just tag the <div /> with a class.

If the quality of the implementation weren't bad enough, this method isn't even new.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: