Re: [WSG] Make em' pay for IE
Peter Firminger wrote: I totally disagree. IE (with it's problems) is the dominant browser and it's absolutely your problem (the web developer) to make sure the site you build for a client works on the most likely user-agent. Didn't nay not to make the site work in IE. What I'm suggesting is letting them know that in order to make it 100% functional in IE, that extra work is needed. You're going to due it anyway, why no let client know about it? Again, I'm not suggesting to increase the bill--using standards will often lower the bill--just letting them know that if it wasn't required to support IE 100% (not an option these days) they'd be saving some money. As far as non-IE extras, they should be exactly that--extra. A site need to have a 100% lever of functionality and a 100% look in IE, but in a compliant browser, maybe the look could be 110%? Users would only know they were missing something if they saw the site in a compliant browser. These are features which would otherwise not be included because IE can't handle it, so adding them for free only improves the site without any cost involved (beyond a few extra bytes). * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help *
Re: [WSG] Make em' pay for IE
El vie, 04-06-2004 a las 12:59, Mordechai Peller escribió: As far as non-IE extras, they should be exactly that--extra. A site need to have a 100% lever of functionality and a 100% look in IE, but in a compliant browser, maybe the look could be 110%? Users would only know they were missing something if they saw the site in a compliant browser. These are features which would otherwise not be included because IE can't handle it, so adding them for free only improves the site without any cost involved (beyond a few extra bytes). FYI, that concept is called MOSE and described here http://www.mezzoblue.com/archives/2003/06/25/mose/ -- Manuel trabaja para Simplelógica, construcción web (+34) 985 22 12 65http://simplelogica.net escribe en Logicola http://simplelogica.net/logicola/ * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help *
RE: [WSG] Make em' pay for IE
Title: RE: [WSG] Make em' pay for IE I agree word for word with Mark on this Jamie Mason: Design -Original Message- From: Mark Harwood WebMail [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 04 June 2004 12:23 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [WSG] Make em' pay for IE Im sorry but you never ever suggest to a client that the site will not work in IE, 9 time out of 10 a client will only know about IE. If your suggesting standards you should know what and what not to do to make a standard site work accross all browsers. I would never ever suggest a site will take longer to do due to getting it to work in IE, if you have to do that state that there will be a extra Testing Period in which you will be working over multiple platforms and browsers to check all features are compatible. Your never gonna get a client that says i dont want this to work in ie! and if you ever did it more than like'ly the person could do it them self * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help *
RE: [WSG] Make em' pay for IE
Thanks Jamie, i know this is off topic, but you dont happen to work at the sky offices in Hudderfeild do you? I had the pleasure of being offered a job there when i was about 19/20 and bodged it by requesting to much salary... they never got back to me _ On Fri, 4 Jun 2004 12:43 , Jamie Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED] sent: RE: [WSG] Make em' pay for IE I agree word for word with Mark on this Jamie Mason: Design -Original Message- From: Mark Harwood WebMail [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 04 June 2004 12:23 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [WSG] Make em' pay for IE Im sorry but you never ever suggest to a client that the site will not work in IE, 9 time out of 10 a client will only know about IE. If your suggesting standards you should know what and what not to do to make a standard site work accross all browsers. I would never ever suggest a site will take longer to do due to getting it to work in IE, if you have to do that state that there will be a extra Testing Period in which you will be working over multiple platforms and browsers to check all features are compatible. Your never gonna get a client that says i dont want this to work in ie! and if you ever did it more than like'ly the person could do it them self * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help * * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help *
Re: [WSG] Make em' pay for IE
Manuel González Noriega wrote: FYI, that concept is called MOSE and described here http://www.mezzoblue.com/archives/2003/06/25/mose/ Thanks. So someone with more clout than me said it about a year ago. What I'm adding is that we should let the client know we're doing it, but not charging them anything extra for it. And don't think of it as giving away free labor; think of it as investing a little extra time today in order to make your lives easier tomorrow. * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help *
Re: [WSG] Make em' pay for IE
Mark Harwood WebMail wrote: Im sorry but you never ever suggest to a client that the site will not work in IE, 9 time out of 10 a client will only know about IE. If your suggesting standards you should know what and what not to do to make a standard site work accross all browsers. I said the site should me 100% functional in IE; doing otherwise, in most cases, is foolish. I am suggesting additional, unneeded functionality. I would never ever suggest a site will take longer to do due to getting it to work in IE, In other words, you'll lie to your client because you think they're too stupid to understand that dealing with the problems in IE is one of the costs of doing business and no less real than paying taxes and the electric company. if you have to do that state that there will be a extra Testing Period in which you will be working over multiple platforms and browsers to check all features are compatible. Most clients will understand if you tell them that anyone who would give them the same quality site will also build compliant first and then patch; the only difference is that you respect them enough to let them know about it. * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help *
Re: [WSG] Make em' pay for IE
In other words, you'll lie to your client because you think they're too stupid to understand that dealing with the problems in IE is one of the costs of doing business and no less real than paying taxes and the electric company. Im sorry but i can safely say that i have no need to lie to my client as i get my project timelines correct the first time, i have no need to have to rework my projects due to issuse with IE as i know of the issuse IE has with CSS and i also have a pretty standard way of getting them all out of the way first time round. * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help *
RE: [WSG] Make em' pay for IE
Nothing like a bit of commercial suicide to thin the web development ranks :o) Mike Pepper (Nearly exhausted) Accessible Web Developer www.seowebsitepromotion.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Mordechai Peller Sent: 04 June 2004 00:24 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; webdesign-l Subject: [WSG] Make em' pay for IE If you try to complain about IE to a client, they'll most likely say that that's our problem. The truth is, since they are paying the bill, it's their problem. It seems that the only way to get truth through to them is to include in the invoice: Corrections To Make IE Compatible. If they say that we should therefor forget about the other browsers, just tell them even if we did that, there would be no time savings because we would still need to compensate for IE's bugginess. Top it off by offering to throw in for free some bell and whistles which IE doesn't support. This should do two things: 1) Make people aware that 100% IE support will cost them money. (But don't compromise on one bit of functionality, just some polish.) 2) By creating a difference between IE and compliant browsers, people will begin to realize that there is a difference. Will this mean the end of IE dominance? I doubt it. It may however lead to the end of IE's super-dominance, which should be good enough. * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help * * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help *
