Using rounded corners with IE today

2005-06-23

The information published in this post is now out-of-date and one or more links are invalid.

—IEBlog Editor, 21 August 2012

Web developers often want to add rounded corners to their
pages. Since we have no plans to do native rounded corner support in IE7 (CSS3
feature), I want to point out that there is an article available on MSDN that
shows you how you can easily and efficiently implement rounded corners with IE
today. Enjoy!

https://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/dhtmltechcol/dndhtml/roundcorners.asp

-- Markus Mielke

Comments

Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removed
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The MSDN solution is overkill.

Try
http://openrico.org/demos.page?demo=ricoEffectRound.html
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
"Perhaps you're tired of waiting for the W3C to release the CSS3 Recommendations, which will include specifications for rounded corners, and—even better—several border properties."

Is that article implying that if the W3C were to finalize CSS3, then IE would move to support it?

Well, CSS 2/2.1 is finalized. If IE7 doesn't support it, I'm going to cry "hypocrite."

Remember this moment. This may give us the proof we need when IE7 comes.

Or maybe you'll get it right, and I'll rejoice and sing your praises and be much more productive in developing web sites.

(Well, IE6 will still be a problem for the forseeable future...)
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Wow, I did not know that there are CSS tutorials on MSDN. This is really a nice article, they even mention the semantic disadvantages of the last solution.

What I do not understand is why the headline says "in Internet Explorer" - of course this method is not an IE-only feature.

I think they could have left out the possibilites using tables, these are not necessary any more.

By the way, both links on the bottom of the page do not work (the value of the type-attribute is missing).

Thanks for telling us that you won't implement CSS3 working drafts (which is right) - I'll keep wating for the posts that say what parts of the CSS-specifications you are going to implement :)
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removed
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removed
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
border.svg:
<?xml version="1.0"?>
<svg viewBox="0 0 100 100">
<rect x="0" y="0" width="100" height="100" rx="25" ry="25 fill="blue"/>
</svg>

er, something like that
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
"Well, CSS 2/2.1 is finalized. If IE7 doesn't support it, I'm going to cry 'hypocrite.'"

Actually, CSS 2.1 went back to Last Call Working Draft on June 13 (ie. it's -not- finalised), and it's well-known that CSS2 is too full of errors to use reliably. So, please, no cries of hypocracy just yet.
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Yet another slap in the face.

Why can't you put some serious effort into improving Trident?
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
This is bad joke...
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
No designer worth his salt would consider doing this (much less supporting it all around a large site). To me, this looks like what a programmer who wants to get the boss off his back would do.

As for the "easily" and "efficiently" parts, I had better not comment.
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removed
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removed
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
J. King:
Touché. CSS 2.1 is in last call.

But as I understand it unless some huge mistakes are found by July 15, 2005, it will pretty much be finalized.

And I do not expect a final version of IE7, much less a release candidate, by July 15.

I'm starting to doubt we'll see a beta by then, either. Even so, nobody says a few minor details cannot change between a beta and final release, otherwise we'd be skipping the beta.

So yes, I'll give IE the July 15 date, and if any beta versions after that date don't support CSS 2.1, I'll surely have the right to cry foul on this article.
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Can I assume that IE7 will include some way to update its rendering engine via service packs or some other modular system? It makes sense not to waste time supporting as-yet unfinished drafts of CSS3, but a lot of it SHOULD be worked on before it's finished, so that once it is a recommendation we don't have to wait another five years for IE to support it.
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removed
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
One-Element-With-Four-Corners implementation:

http://vitaly.harisov.name/example/corners.html
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removed
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
um, whats wrong with an image in each corner? Seems by far the easiest, and fastest, and least maintenance. Least always has worked for me - but I guess I just am one that sticks with what has always worked and dont look to reinvent the wheel.
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
> um, whats wrong with an image in each corner?

<img> element is content, round corners is appearance.
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
> You may do round corners using one element and CSS2.

Sorry, CSS 2.1.
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
MSDN has a new article on doing rounded corners in IE (via IEBlog). None of the solutions they suggest really separates content and presentation well - they all involve extra markup of one sort or another. It's amusing that they criticise the four-divs-and-CSS solution as being "difficult to read", having just suggested a table-based solution which is a lot more markup-heavy. My current favourite method is the Nifty Corners JavaScript library. (Note that the version I link to is free software; later versions are not.) After all, if JS is turned off, you just get square corners. No big deal. I also note with interest the following quote from the article: So, you're staring at your Web site. It all looks very boxy, and you're thinking that it would be nice if you could add some rounded corners. Perhaps you're tired of waiting for the W3C to release the CSS3 Recommendations, which will include specifications for rounded corners, andeven betterseveral border properties. The good news is that you don't have to wait any longer... I am glad that Microsoft is committed to supporting CSS3 as soon as it is released, as it's clear from this quote that the unfinished nature of the spec is the only thing holding them back....
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
This is news! People have been doing this for a while, but of course they're always the extra markup that get's really messy to manage for large projects. This kind of thing as been around for years. (in fact MSDN nicely outlined all the wrong way's to do this). You support a lot of things that aren't in standards, like vbscript and activeX, why not support something that is at least planned and will be in the standards very soon?

Great job at innovation guys!
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removed
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Moz's rounded corner implementation still has some issues - namely lack of antialising and background image bleding. However it's definitely the right way to go. I recently had a design that was pretty much impossible to accomplish in IE; it needed a moving container with a rounded top left corner on top of a static background. Without using alpha PNGs or CSS rounding we had to give up on it (and unfortunately in Fx too due to the lack of AA and a sense of consistency).
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removed
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Wow, still using tables in 2005 to create a visual layout. MS devs sure are lagging behind. I hope no one takes their advice on web user interfaces.
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
I can't believe you've linked to this terrible article. In the days of semantic markup and CSS you are suggesting that web devs alter their data to get a visual effect. Astonishing. I hope that Mr Mielke won't be allowed to blog again here.
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Uh oh! Dean Edwards has been stirred from slumber...

MSFT better respond before another prominent dev pops in.

BTW, this story article needs a good Slashdotting!
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
LOL!
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
"Moz's rounded corner implementation still has some issues - namely lack of antialising and background image bleding. However it's definitely the right way to go."

This is being worked on by someone... Can't remember his name now, but he's got a webpage showing his progress on this. I'll post it when I find it.
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Personally, I think the DIV solution is best, but JavaScript building it, keeping the source clean.

Here's a design I've been throwing around which uses divs & javascript http://www.larndan.e7even.com/
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
I followed the link. And I just laughed.
You must be kidding.
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
I reckon that this post is deliberately planted to to spread 'viral hatred' around the blogosphere.

This will drive traffic in the short term to IEBlog, where, according to Scoble, there will be a big announcement later today from Hachamovitch (probably just a public demo of IE7).

Any publicity is good publicity...
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removed
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removed
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Yeah, don't bother using hundreds of nested <div>. Use the JavaScript way...
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removed
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removed
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
You guys got nothing better to work on than bringing up ridiculous posts like the former?

Jeff, I'd agree with you there. Markus should rather sink effort into breaking up the svg against vml muddle.
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
I wrote a little more about the true way rounded corners should be accomplished: <a href="http://blog.codedread.com/archives/2005/06/23/rounded-corners-the-last-word/">http://blog.codedread.com/archives/2005/06/23/rounded-corners-the-last-word/</a>
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removed
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removed
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Here's the page detailing the work on improving Mozilla's & KHTML's border and background handling:

http://verens.com/borders/borders.html
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Yeah, that's the project I was thinking of. Maybe the IE team can get some tips :)
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
How did the IE team think we were going to respond... There has not been a single positive comment.

I don't expect the IE team to defend themselves and post a rebuttal. It's 7AM in Redmond, the team should be first seeing this comment.
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
"Since we have no plans to do native rounded corner support in IE7 (CSS3 feature)"

Sincerely: May I ask WHY?!

For spite? Can't be IE finally 100% compliant?

:|||||||
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removed
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Please, Please, Please tell your folks at Microsoft, to STOP POSTING SAMPLE CODE THAT DOESN'T MEET XHTML 1.0!!!!!!!

<http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/#h-4.2>

In the referenced article, and all over MSDN, Microsoft constantly uses:

<UPPERCASETAG>sample text data</UPPERCASETAG>

Not only is it REALLY ANNOYING! it is so blatently wrong!

Pretend for a moment, that IE7 will actually be a good, standards based browser, and show some commitment to the future of the Web, and not resort to these "circa 1990" code snippets. That's right, if nothing else, by using <TABLE>, and <BR>, you are making it look like you haven't done web design in this Century!

Thank you
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
I just have a personal web site, and even I know that UPPERCASE tags and attributes are wrong.

The IE developers are partying like it's 1998. Someone go in their and tear a few sheets off their wall calendar. If they think security is the public's only concern, they have another think coming to them. If sites are prettier in Firefox than in IE, who wouldn't switch?

When I see an article on MSDN with UPPERCASE tags, I just stop reading right there. Whoever wrote it is dumber than even me.
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removed
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
I just want to second or third the Nifty Corners solution. It is mostly CSS and works pretty well across browsers.
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removed
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Thanks for all your feedback. I just shortly want to point out: There is no perfect solution until CSS3 is ready and most browsers have implemented it (us included). Until then each solution has their pro/cons. Please feel free to use the comments here to share what you think your best solution is.

Thanks
-- Markus
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
I agree with Jeff, it would be premature to implement CSS 3 rounded corners.

As for the uppercase tags, it's not an error in HTML, but it still "smells bad". I've not come across any competent developer that has used uppercase tags in years. I have, however, seen plenty of complete idiots using uppercase tags. It could be the best code in the world that is in that article, but I'm still going to read it with the preconception that whoever wrote it doesn't know what they are doing.
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Are you kidding me?!
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Addition to my previous comment: even if one were to implement rounded corners using this ugly GIF solution, one should at least put all the corners into the same image so that the browser doesn't have to do four requests instead of just one. It improves the performance significantly, especially in IE that always sends If-Modified-Since requests for cached files regardless expiration headers (btw will this be fixed in IE7?). Here are the details: http://wellstyled.com/css-nopreload-rollovers.html.
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Nifty Corners:

http://pro.html.it/articoli/id_599/idcat_31/pag_1/pag.html
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removed
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
All caps tags and attributes are very definitely an error in the current standards, XHTML 1.0 and 1.1. They do not validate. This has been true for about four years now.

All caps tags were permissible under HTML 4.01, which dates back before the turn of the century.
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removed
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
True, Mr. Clown. Microsoft should not be measuring itself against Firefox. It should be measuring itself against standards.

I wrote some help files for a developer. They were in XHTML 1.1, encoded as UTF-8, and they validated. He decided to use them for another application so he edited them but needed help. The files were not UTF-8, some had over 100 errors according to the validator, and they were filled with uppercase tags, illegal tags, unclosed tags, and tags that had no business loitering in there.

I cleaned it all up. I couldn't believe the developer had produced that big of a mess, so I asked him how he edited the files.

In Visual Studio, he said. No wonder.

I understand that Visual Studio 2005 is going to use this century's standards and generate valid XHMTL 1.1. I suspect IE7 will match VS2005. I just hope Microsoft doesn't implement a subset of the standards, like now (no position:fixed, for example).

Microsoft got in trouble once before for implementing standards before they were standardized, so I think CSS3 is too much to expect.
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removed
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
That article is garbage.

It uses unsemantic tables to present a stucture that is, well, not a table.

Get with it. A CROSS BROWSER, CSS solution has been in the community for over a year now.

Thanks for coming out though, and btw, don't you dare destroy RSS.
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
You missed a good opportunity to impress people. Instead of just a 'catch up to Firefox release' you could have went for CSS3 support and brought in a whole new era of web design. The blogs would all have something nice to say about IE 7....

Instead you demonstrate you don't get the web. At least you don't get the difference between proactive and reactive.
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
>>Instead you demonstrate you don't get the web. At least you don't get the difference between proactive and reactive.

No. That is what got them into the predicament that they are in now. Hello people!! CSS3 has not been cemented as a standard yet. It would be foolish to release a browser right now that fully suported CSS3 because you would just have to revoke it when the real CSS3 was cemented. Brains people ... use em.
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Staying ahead of the curve?? OMGWTF, lousy round corners?
Once upon a time there was MS IE staying ahead of the curve proposing vml? The MSOffice guys bent their mind to that zombie?
Go and see http://www.antigrain.com/demo/index.html ? How about adding real scalable graphics (binary) behaviour to IE??
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Markus, stop hiding behind your computer screen and at least put up a decent argument as to why we should use the solutions you suggested.
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removed
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Awwwwwwweeeeesssssoooooommmmmmmeeeeee.

Welcome to 4 years ago.
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Those that pointed fingers at IE till now for avoiding "standards" are introducing "standards" of their own? What nonsense is this? Mozilla is a batch of hypocrisy!

And yes, these methods for rounding corners aren't IE-only and have been around for ages.

k. I'm done. Keep up the great work IE-Team :)
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
-moz-border-radius (and other -moz-??s) is perfectly standards compliant. Check out the section on vendor specific keywords in the spec.
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Jim,
'standards' method for that crooked shapes to a great extent is svg? That antigrain stuff let's you add basic svg behavior to ie in a couple of days. Markus may start with the svg behaviour tonight? At least it would keep him far away from the 'corners with ie today' type of innovations:-))
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Where to start.
1)Ugh, code you linked to, ugh.
2)On the release of ie7, Please wait until CSS3 is finalized, something tells me you will need the extra time anyway.
3)Id have more insults but I feel that they were taken care of by previous commenters.
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removed
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
MSFT is trying to push this article off the front page viewing area.
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
a TABLE?! You will never learn, right?
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
You do realize that capital letters in html documents went out of style with the xhtml standard, right?
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Modern Web Developer said:
> Please, Please, Please tell your folks at Microsoft,
> to STOP POSTING SAMPLE CODE THAT DOESN'T MEET XHTML 1.0
Say why? HTML 4.01 would be more than enough...

Ken said
> All caps tags and attributes are very definitely
> an error in the current standards, XHTML 1.0 and 1.1.
> They do not validate. This has been true for about
> four years now.
Your point?

> All caps tags were permissible under HTML 4.01,
> which dates back before the turn of the century.
Uh, your point again? XHTML 1.0 is merely XML'd version of HTML 4.01, and even though it's acceptable to send it as text/html it's basically rendered as HTML 4.01 when you do so anyway.

Check Anne van Kesteren's blog, he went back to good ol' HTML to show how useless XHTML is right now.

HTML 4.01 IS a standard, the only thing XHTML 1.0 could bring over it is XML and modules, which need the XML mode and MSIE doesn't handle XHTML (try feeding it a page sent with application/xhtml+xml MIME type).

and HTML 5 will be a standard too, at the same time as XHTML 2.0, even though they cast aside al synchronization between the two branches for the occation.

Fred Clown said:
> Not to mention that they aren't standard.
They are proprietary and defined so according to the spec's guidelines, using the spec-defined prefix.
> The only browser to support it so far is Safari.
Wrong, Safari, Konquerror and iCab3 are all supposed to pass Acid2... as development versions

Jesse said:

> You missed a good opportunity to impress people.
> Instead of just a 'catch up to Firefox release'
> you could have went for CSS3 support and brought
> in a whole new era of web design. The blogs would
> all have something nice to say about IE 7....
Guess they could've gone for CSS2.1 for a start...

I can understand the IE team not gunning for CSS3, even as a development feature that'd be update with the draft, but not implementing CSS2.1? Not bothering getting fully CSS1 compliant (and i'm not talking about CSS1 Core, no one talks about CSS1 Core when he talks about CSS1 compliance) or implementing advanced CSS selectors (mmm, yummy first-child, next-sibling, first-letter... too bad ya can't use them)

Jim said:
>
Those that pointed fingers at IE till now for avoiding
> "standards" are introducing "standards" of their own?
> What nonsense is this? Mozilla is a batch of hypocrisy!
Uuuh, no? Your post doesn't even make sense man...

Mozilla implemented vendor-specific rounded corners. They don't follow CSS3 specs, but don't claim to be standard or soon to be standardized, and they use Mozilla's vendor-specific prefix defined by the CSS spec (-moz-).
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removed
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Great tip!!!!!!
Here's anothr one u might like. If u want 2 hav txt in all diffent color make image in MS Paint with txt in it of right color. Save as .bmp file and load in 2 yor page! Wicked color!!
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removed
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removed
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
ah, yes, the always popular IE using-stupid-ancient-techniques-in-order-to-overcome-obsolete-browser-technology technique...

it's a well known one and has been dealt with for years by web developers desiring to build open, portable, true web applications.

thanks for nothing...
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removed
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
HTML 4.01 loose (pref strict.dtd) is fine.

Table with rounded corners is a low-tech solution, very easy to implement, and tends not to suffer from the cross browser CSS implementation "bugs" that occur with cleverer/better implementations. And they tend to size with content (height-wise anyway) btter than many of the javascript/css solutions.

And what if JavaScript is disabled in your clients browser? I've seen a few clients who do this for external sites.

Until we get proper CSS support across all browsers, a pragmatic use of tables for content will still work for many people.

But please, do investigate the alternatives.
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
This 'solution' is a laugh. Maybe IE7 'll support :after and :before (like all the other browsers), this requiers no extra markup.
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Poor mans rounded corners

<fieldset><legend>round corners</legend>Sort of round</fieldset>
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Have a look at this for a another solution to rounded corners:-

http://www.webreference.com/programming/css_borders/index.html
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removed
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Ahhh, more lazyness of the IE people. Nice.
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removed
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
I really hope that MS will use WindowsUpdate to it's full potential to get IE7 on users' PCs. We can't afford to wait 2 years or however long it takes to get 95% of IE users on v7.

And then, it would be good if they could patch up any standards compliance bugs as quickly as they deal with security problems. And distribute patches immediately to everyone via WindowsUpdate. If they can lead in this area you can guarantee that the Firefox and Safari teams will raise their game too with their release cycles.

Microsoft has shown recently that it can do a very good job of managing software updates - it could really get ahead of the competing browsers if it can stay ahead of the standards rather than playing catch up. Perhaps this is a perfect opportunity for them to demonstrate that they can compete on all fronts with open source software?

If WindowsUpdate is not used it will be a big opportunity missed.
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removed
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removed
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removed
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
> Who the heck cares what the friggin code looks like?

The people who have to read and write it all day every day?

> the only thing that matters is what that markup does, not how it looks.

I can only imagine you haven't written anything but the most trivial "hello world" type programs.

Spagetti code simply costs more to maintain. Maybe if it were a hobby project that has one or two people working on it, it might not matter, but for serious work, how clean the code is matters. Matters enough to be able to measure the difference in cold hard cash.

> And I hate to break it to you - but it really is not that big of a deal if your site is cross browser compatible or not.

And I hate to break it to you, but if I dropped cross-browser compatibility, I'd be out of work.

> If you have a site that all it does is have firefox plugins and tutorials on it - who cares if it works in IE

That's a contrived example that is not representative of almost any real-world situation.

> if you have a site that deals with a user group that includes no techy people

Who cares how techy they are? Absolutely loads of people use schools, libraries and their workplace to surf - these are situations where the knowledge to pick a browser is not a factor in the slightest. They use what they are given.

> and your products are built for windows

Again, not representative of most companies.

> then you are looking at about 98 percent IE usage rate - so who cares if it works in Moz?

Would you accept 98% of your salary because your boss said he couldn't be bothered going to the "extra effort" of paying you 100% of your salary?

What boss in his right mind would willingly throw away 2% of his customers for no good reason?

And you've made the assumption that 2% of visitors equals 2% of profits, haven't you? It could well be that the 2% of your user base you throw away is disproportionately higher spenders than the rest. Who's going to be checking out your website on a handheld, for instance - somebody who earns minimum wage, or somebody with lots of disposable income?

> IE last I checked still has 95 percent usage on the windows platform

So in other words, everywhere you said "2%", replace that with "5%, plus however many non-Windows users there are"? That's upwards of one in twenty people you are saying nobody cares about. You really think a company wouldn't care about a 5%+ drop in sales?

> combine with my own logs

Oh wow, access logs. They are really accurate. You might as well just make up the numbers, guesswork is just as accurate as observing HTTP traffic. And that's before you factor in the near certainty that your traffic is not everyone's target market. And that's before you factor in the problem of self-fulfilling prophecy - if you are building websites that don't work in Firefox, then you are undoubtedly going to see far less traffic from Firefox users than if you are building websites that work in Firefox.

> The only thing that is important is that you meet the needs of your users.

...says the person who is quite willing to show 5%+ of them the door. How are you meeting their needs?
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removed
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
If Microsoft are really this out of touch with web development, and the state of the web in general, I can't say I have much faith in IE7 being a reasonable browser.
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Was this post a joke?

No, seriously. Was it a joke?
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
IE team,

Thus far I've read your blog without complaint, hopeful that IE7 would finally alleviate my web-design pains.

But this is too much to bear.

I came up with solutions very much like those listen in the MSDN article as a Semester 1 Internet Publishing student -- in maybe ten minutes!

It’s a very crude solution, and one that necessitates the intermingling of content and style -- something today’s web designers, including myself, are leary (and weary) of doing. (Site redesign should mean something here.)

The CSS3 solution is plainly the best, as it allows the content/style separation. -moz-border-radius is workable (Google Adwords uses it for its nav tabs). A true CSS3 border-radius property would be the best of all, as it would allow browser-independent, CSS-only control of corners without any silly GIFs or what-have-you.

If IE7 does not allow CSS-based rounded corners, guess which of my sites’ visitors will not be seeing any rounded corners?

On behalf of webmasters everywhere, I implore you, IE team, to include a CSS-based solution for rounded corners! Thank you for you time, and please consider my request!

Alan Hogan
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removed
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Wow, the entirety of software engineering has been disproved by some guy commenting on a blog. Good stuff to know.
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removed
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removed
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
I tried the VML example above. It works very nice, except for the fact that arcsize is forced to a percentage and can't be an element/pixel unit. But it integrates VERY nicely with HTML (something that SVG implementations currently bawk at).

The fact that the article Microsoft posted doesn't even mention VML is an indication that the technology has been abandoned or has been merged into XAML.

Why doesn't someone write a server-script that can translate SVG into VML so that way IE 5/6 users can view primitive SVG without a plugin? Or why don't IE developers simply add equivalent support for SVG to IE? It looks like the work is already done for simple shapes, colours, paths so you could start your level of support there.
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removed
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removed
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Oh well, users are quite too ungrateful and hard to please, with the poor Microsoft, that doesn't have enough means to make excellency !

Btw webdevelopers should know that IE7 (not Dean's one) will not be available for other systems than Longhorn, so they have to continue to work with tables, pictures and hardcoded appearance.

NB. this com is ironical...
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removed
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removed
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
We have a simple to use application called EZRound that creates the graphic, slices it and writes the correct HTML to allow it to function as a resizable "container". You can also import your own design from Photoshop or PaintShop (over 40 formats) and it will use it instead. It even takes care of managing the filenames. Since it ships with 70 designs ready to use, a lot of folks are using it.

It has done quite well since its release in February and seems to function in most any browser. It is table based (for now - we are working on an option to generate CSS instead), but there is an option to generate the code lowercase for XHTML<g>.

IMHO, this is without a doubt the easiest way to do rounded corner tables (as well as drop shadows and other effects such as tombstone and hanging tab designs).

Speaking of CSS...

We'd love to get feedback and opinions on what CSS methods will work the best. Obviously folks have been pursuing a CSS solution to this for a long time and some methods work better than others. You folks are out there in the trenches and know what works and what does not - so we place a lot of value on your opinions.

Anyone who is interested is invited to download the trial edition of EZRound from www.ezround.com and check it out. Then if you have ideas on the CSS edition, we have a contact form on the website.

We will also be assembling a beta test team for those who are serious about having a solution like this that generates CSS.

Thanks!

Charles
Team EZRound
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
"Since we have no plans to do native rounded corner support in IE7 (CSS3 feature)"

So you have no plans to add support for an established web standard to Internet Explorer? Why am I not surprised? Guess you're too busy inventing proprietary extensions for existing standards to implement support for established W3C standards, eh guys? I mean, why support a CSS3 feature when you haven't even got full support for CSS2 or CSS1 for that matter?

On behalf of web designers across the world, I must extend my most heartfelt jeers to you for continuing to stagnate and make painful the field of web design as both a hobby and a business. I hope you're proud of yourselves.
Anonymous
March 15, 2007
PingBack from http://gz.sunsblog.net/?p=12
Anonymous
May 30, 2007
PingBack from http://blog.tengutech.net/2007/05/26/going-round-the-corners/
Anonymous
April 20, 2008
PingBack from http://www.mikepadgett.com/technology/technical/more-ie-woes-the-curved-corner-div/
Anonymous
September 21, 2008
PingBack from http://blog.urbanmainframe.com/2008/09/ie_sucks/
Anonymous
November 16, 2008
PingBack from http://www.zzzombie.com/2008/11/16/apprenez-a-mal-coder-grace-aux-tutoriaux-msdn/
Anonymous
May 29, 2009
PingBack from http://paidsurveyshub.info/story.php?title=ieblog-using-rounded-corners-with-ie-today
Anonymous
June 01, 2009
PingBack from http://portablegreenhousesite.info/story.php?id=11372
Anonymous
June 08, 2009
PingBack from http://insomniacuresite.info/story.php?id=8774
Anonymous
June 12, 2009
PingBack from http://jointpainreliefs.info/story.php?id=1120
Anonymous
June 13, 2009
PingBack from http://gardendecordesign.info/story.php?id=525
Anonymous
June 15, 2009
PingBack from http://einternetmarketingtools.info/story.php?id=10034
Anonymous
June 16, 2009
PingBack from http://fixmycrediteasily.info/story.php?id=2820

Share via

Using rounded corners with IE today

Comments

Additional resources