[uf-discuss] [rethinking abbr] Does deserve another look?

Mon, 30 Apr 2007 10:37:40 -0700

Perhaps I'm getting into this a bit late and this has already been brought up, but I've skimmed through the conversation and haven't seen it. Tantek's original proposal[1] was scrapped because it didn't work in Safari 1.2.1 (WebKit v125). Hasn't that particular browser version been obsoleted to that point that we can reconsider using it? The latest Safari version for OS X.3 is 1.3.9, which is soon to be two OS versions back. Any idea precisely when this bug was fixed?

While few browser stats break Safari versions down to the WebKit version, my site has received 1 hit from from WebKit v125, and that tiny marketshare is reflected in other stats I've found[2]. If we are going to talk about < 1% browsers, why are we holding back an otherwise ideal design pattern for an obsoleted version of a minor browser?

<object> is ideal, as Tantek described it, and it is both simple to write and backwards-compatible.

[1]: http://tantek.com/log/2005/01.html#d26t0100
[2]: http://www.webreference.com/stats/browser.html

--
Ryan Cannon

Interactive Developer
http://RyanCannon.com



_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss

Reply via email to