Re: [WSG] web stanards detection - is it possible?
sam sherlock wrote: What I would like to be able to do is detect to see if the user has the proper support for web standards and if not redirect them to a version of the site using old skool junk HTML ... So I am wondering: what the WSG members think of the idea? has something like this been made? The whole idea of using web standards is to have a single version of a page sent to all browsers. Yes, older browsers (which make up an increasingly small percentage of the overall browsing population) may not get the full effect, but unless you know for a fact that a large number of your visitors are still using things like Netscape 4.x I'd say it's not worth the effort anymore. About 5 years ago, perhaps...but not in 2005. IMHO, of course. -- Patrick H. Lauke __ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com __ Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ ** 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] web stanards detection - is it possible?
G'day What I would like to be able to do is detect to see if the user has the proper support for web standards and if not redirect them to a version of the site using old skool junk HTML Why? What benefit does anyone (developer, site owner, 1 visitor in a million) gain from that junk HTML? Owen Briggs used a style class named .ahem set to display: hidden which links user to alternative content If a site is properly constructed with (x)html, it will be accessible in IE/NN4 (and perhaps older versions). Give them working, accessible content without frills, rather than bending over backwards to give them something that looks the same but is an awful mess in the engine compartment. of course i am seeking to make this whole thing graceful and silent, ie users don't have to be aware or made aware of thier inefior browser just get redirected. So I am wondering: what the WSG members think of the idea? I am but one member and can't speak for the others, but I think it a waste of time. Why maintain two separate versions (or 3 if you throw in a text only version) when one will do? Just hide the CSS they don't understand and give them a plain-vanilla site. They'll get used to it as more and more sites go down that path. Regards -- Bert Doorn, Better Web Design http://www.betterwebdesign.com.au/ Fast-loading, user-friendly websites ** 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] web stanards detection - is it possible?
You can easily chack if someone's browser has DOM support by including
this in the header:
script type=text/javascript
!--//
if (!document.getElementById)
{window.location=altindex.html}
// --
/script
and this will redirect the user to an alternative html file of your
choice: some folk suggest that the user upgrades and provides link(s)
accordingly, some redirect to a basic page.
However, in the long run, it isn't worth it, as the others have said.
Just let the page degrade gracefully in old browsers.
HTH,
Bob McClelland
www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk
sam sherlock wrote:
What I would like to be able to do is detect to see if the user has
the proper support
for web standards and if not redirect them to a version of the site
using old skool junk HTML
---
Owen Briggs used a style class named .ahem set to display: hidden
which links user to alternative content
http://www.thenoodleincident.com/tutorials/box_lesson/index.html
--
of course i am seeking to make this whole thing graceful and silent,
ie users don't have to be aware or made
aware of thier inefior browser just get redirected.
So I am wondering:
what the WSG members think of the idea?
has something like this been made?
atb Sam
**
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] web stanards detection - is it possible?
Thanks for the responses. I agree with the points being made so far I am relucant to maintain two sites (actually I am using PHP to rebuild the junk from the XHTML semantic site and will be adding a full flash version too :) but this is not a php list ) Bert Doorn wrote: Why? What benefit does anyone (developer, site owner, 1 visitor in a million) gain from that junk HTML? Its down to what users are expecting really. The site owner and visitor are not expecting a plain unformated site Bert Doorn wrote: Just hide the CSS they don't understand and give them a plain-vanilla site. They'll get used to it as more and more sites go down that path. I hope we get there soon Bob McClelland wrote: You can easily chack if someone's browser has DOM support... and this will redirect the user to an alternative html file of your choice: some folk suggest that the user upgrades and provides link(s) accordingly, some redirect to a basic page. However, in the long run, it isn't worth it, as the others have said. Just let the page degrade gracefully in old browsers. --- new resolution Basic Splash Page that degrades (though in my case it can't degrade too much) directing the user to a site more suited to them (with some PHP trickery and a list of Bad Browsers) I don't want to emabrk upon a a tangent taking us off the focus of this list, lets say I had a list of known bad browsers and they get put to Junk/Old Skool site and all others go to the full xhtml experience (others later can view the full flash experience) Since this is a music media site the main user base are expecting glitz n glamour, bells n whisltes a plenty. Not giving them this is against the wishes of the site owner. The other alternative is to rule out webstandards for thhis project. which woul mean ruling out the benefits also - site owner would enjoy these, as would visitor, as would I atb egar to see what you think S Bert Doorn wrote: G'day What I would like to be able to do is detect to see if the user has the proper support for web standards and if not redirect them to a version of the site using old skool junk HTML Why? What benefit does anyone (developer, site owner, 1 visitor in a million) gain from that junk HTML? Owen Briggs used a style class named .ahem set to display: hidden which links user to alternative content If a site is properly constructed with (x)html, it will be accessible in IE/NN4 (and perhaps older versions). Give them working, accessible content without frills, rather than bending over backwards to give them something that looks the same but is an awful mess in the engine compartment. of course i am seeking to make this whole thing graceful and silent, ie users don't have to be aware or made aware of thier inefior browser just get redirected. So I am wondering: what the WSG members think of the idea? I am but one member and can't speak for the others, but I think it a waste of time. Why maintain two separate versions (or 3 if you throw in a text only version) when one will do? Just hide the CSS they don't understand and give them a plain-vanilla site. They'll get used to it as more and more sites go down that path. Regards ** 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] web stanards detection - is it possible?
On Jul 13, 2005, at 7:03 AM, sam sherlock wrote: Basic Splash Page that degrades (though in my case it can't degrade too much) directing the user to a site more suited to them (with some PHP trickery and a list of Bad Browsers) I don't want to emabrk upon a a tangent taking us off the focus of this list, lets say I had a list of known bad browsers and they get put to Junk/Old Skool site and all others go to the full xhtml experience (others later can view the full flash experience) Since this is a music media site the main user base are expecting glitz n glamour, bells n whisltes a plenty. Not giving them this is against the wishes of the site owner. The key unknowns about your proposal are: - what browsers are included in your list of Bad Browsers (and how much of your audience is that)? - what do you mean by full XHTML experience? What XHTML features are you using that your Bad Browsers can't handle? - does the site owner agree that this is worth doubling the development costs? -- Ben Curtis : webwright bivia : a personal web studio http://www.bivia.com v: (818) 507-6613 ** 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] web stanards detection - is it possible?
Hi All, I actually put a non Dom counter on one of my sites a few months ago, to check how relevant it was in this particular case. The site is a holiday letting agency, so the users are of all kinds and from all IT levels. (But mostly English). You can see the detailed stats showing the 'old browser' users here: http://extremetracking.com/open;unique?login=nondom and it's interesting to see how that compares to the 'modern browser hits. The following data is for the last four months and shows the number of users (not pages) for Dom and nonDom: Month Dom NonDom April 494 7 May 516 3 June 494 6 July 191 2 I presume that the figures are reliable enough and I expect these figures to be representative of sites which are not 'specialist'. I found it interesting, so I thought some of you may do too, esp in view of this recent discussion. Bob McClelland www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk ** 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] web stanards detection - is it possible?
Curious--how do you check for DOM? BL -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of designer Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2005 11:00 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] web stanards detection - is it possible? Hi All, I actually put a non Dom counter on one of my sites a few months ago, to check how relevant it was in this particular case. The site is a holiday letting agency, so the users are of all kinds and from all IT levels. (But mostly English). You can see the detailed stats showing the 'old browser' users here: http://extremetracking.com/open;unique?login=nondom and it's interesting to see how that compares to the 'modern browser hits. The following data is for the last four months and shows the number of users (not pages) for Dom and nonDom: Month Dom NonDom April 494 7 May 516 3 June 494 6 July 191 2 I presume that the figures are reliable enough and I expect these figures to be representative of sites which are not 'specialist'. I found it interesting, so I thought some of you may do too, esp in view of this recent discussion. Bob McClelland www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk ** 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] web stanards detection - is it possible?
Sam Sherlock wrote: Basic Splash Page that degrades... directing the user to a site more suited to them... a list of known bad browsers and they get put... Since this is a music media site the main user base are expecting glitz n glamour, bells n whisltes a plenty. Not giving them this is against the wishes of the site owner. Did we just hit some kind of crazy-ass time warping worm-hole that landed us in 1995? Splash page... best viewed with... click here if you use... Is this Sliders? I thought they canceled that show. I'd say the only question here is: to standardize or not. I certainly would *not* be trying to figure out how many sites I need to build. I already know the answer to that question: One. If your contract has some kind of thou shalt not abandon 4.0 browsers clause, then you'll have to do what you will to support that requirement. This route may include design and feature constraints or degradation in older browsers and it may include non-standard coding to support older browsers, but there is no way I would build additional sites, unless I was being paid -- fully -- for each. -- Best regards, Michael Wilson ** 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] web stanards detection - is it possible?
Sorry, my figures were incorrect - what I thought was the last four months was actually the last 6. The actual figures are: Month Dom Non Dom Feb 296 7 Mar 504 3 April 494 0 May 516 6 June 494 2 July 193 0 ! Bob designer wrote: Hi All, I actually put a non Dom counter on one of my sites a few months ago, to check how relevant it was in this particular case. The site is a holiday letting agency, so the users are of all kinds and from all IT levels. (But mostly English). You can see the detailed stats showing the 'old browser' users here: http://extremetracking.com/open;unique?login=nondom and it's interesting to see how that compares to the 'modern browser hits. The following data is for the last four months and shows the number of users (not pages) for Dom and nonDom: Month Dom NonDom April 494 7 May 516 3 June 494 6 July 191 2 I presume that the figures are reliable enough and I expect these figures to be representative of sites which are not 'specialist'. I found it interesting, so I thought some of you may do too, esp in view of this recent discussion. Bob McClelland www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk ** 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] web stanards detection - is it possible?
it was eariler in the discussion
Bob McClelland
www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk wrote:
if (!document.getElementById)
{window.location=/v4/?dom=false}
Bret Lester wrote:
Curious--how do you check for DOM?
BL
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of designer
Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2005 11:00 AM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] web stanards detection - is it possible?
Hi All,
I actually put a non Dom counter on one of my sites a few months ago, to
check how relevant it was in this particular case. The site is a
holiday letting agency, so the users are of all kinds and from all IT
levels. (But mostly English).
You can see the detailed stats showing the 'old browser' users here:
http://extremetracking.com/open;unique?login=nondom
and it's interesting to see how that compares to the 'modern browser
hits. The following data is for the last four months and shows the
number of users (not pages) for Dom and nonDom:
Month
Dom
NonDom
April
494
7
May
516
3
June
494
6
July
191
2
I presume that the figures are reliable enough and I expect these
figures to be representative of sites which are not 'specialist'.
I found it interesting, so I thought some of you may do too, esp in view
of this recent discussion.
Bob McClelland
www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk
**
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
**
**
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] web stanards detection - is it possible?
Ah yes, nice and simple. I like that. Just joined the mailing list so I
missed that part. Thanks
BL
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of sam sherlock
Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2005 11:49 AM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] web stanards detection - is it possible?
it was eariler in the discussion
Bob McClelland
www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk wrote:
if (!document.getElementById)
{window.location=/v4/?dom=false}
Bret Lester wrote:
Curious--how do you check for DOM?
BL
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of designer
Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2005 11:00 AM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] web stanards detection - is it possible?
Hi All,
I actually put a non Dom counter on one of my sites a few months ago,
to
check how relevant it was in this particular case. The site is a
holiday letting agency, so the users are of all kinds and from all IT
levels. (But mostly English).
You can see the detailed stats showing the 'old browser' users here:
http://extremetracking.com/open;unique?login=nondom
and it's interesting to see how that compares to the 'modern browser
hits. The following data is for the last four months and shows the
number of users (not pages) for Dom and nonDom:
Month
Dom
NonDom
April
494
7
May
516
3
June
494
6
July
191
2
I presume that the figures are reliable enough and I expect these
figures to be representative of sites which are not 'specialist'.
I found it interesting, so I thought some of you may do too, esp in
view
of this recent discussion.
Bob McClelland
www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk
**
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
**
**
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] web stanards detection - is it possible?
further more part of my stratergy is too use some kind of php sniffer script like http://phpsniff.sourceforge.net/ - not straying out of the remit of this list check the following stats produced property_name return value ua mozilla/5.0 (windows; u; windows nt 5.0; en-us; rv:1.7.8) gecko/20050511 firefox/1.0.4 browser fx long_name firefox version 1.0.4 maj_ver 1 min_ver .0.4 letter_ver _javascript_ 1.5 platform win os 2k session cookies Unknown stored cookies Unknown ip 80.44.177.228 language en-us,en gecko 20050511 gecko_ver 1.7.8 html true images true frames true tables true java true plugins true css2 true css1 true iframes true xml true dom true hdml false wml false $client-has_quirk(quirk) must_cache_forms true avoid_popup_windows false cache_ssl_downloads false break_disposition_header false empty_file_input_value false scrollbar_in_way false $client-browser_is(browser) gecko1.3+ true aol false ie6+ false mz1.3+ false ns7+ false op6+ false $client-language_is(language) en true en-us true fr-ca false $client-is(search) b:ns7- false l:en-us true all information gathered with out any need of _javascript_ etc this way it will be easy to check against alist of naughty bad browsers Bret Lester wrote: Curious--how do you check for DOM? BL -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of designer Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2005 11:00 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] web stanards detection - is it possible? Hi All, I actually put a non Dom counter on one of my sites a few months ago, to check how relevant it was in this particular case. The site is a holiday letting agency, so the users are of all kinds and from all IT levels. (But mostly English). You can see the detailed stats showing the 'old browser' users here: http://extremetracking.com/open;unique?login=nondom and it's interesting to see how that compares to the 'modern browser hits. The following data is for the last four months and shows the number of users (not pages) for Dom and nonDom: Month Dom NonDom April 494 7 May 516 3 June 494 6 July 191 2 I presume that the figures are reliable enough and I expect these figures to be representative of sites which are not 'specialist'. I found it interesting, so I thought some of you may do too, esp in view of this recent discussion. Bob McClelland www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk ** 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] web stanards detection - is it possible?
re: php sniffer script Splash Page that degrades (though ... can't degrade too much) Sam, i gotta agree with what Michael said earlier: Did we just hit some kind of crazy-ass time warping worm-hole thatlanded us in 1995?I beg of you, wherever you are, go out and pick up a copy of this book: http://www.wpdfd.com/editorial/wpd1203review.htm#review2 its got some great high level principles in it that may help clear things up. I know it changed the way I think about creating sites. good luck mate, pete
Re: [WSG] web stanards detection - is it possible?
Sam Relying on the User Agent string and browscap in PHP is fraught with danger. Most browsers have the ability to change the UA string. Browser sniffing is a slippery slope... one of those never ending tasks which is more easily solved by coding to the standards and deprecating code nicely to the older clients. HTH James On 7/14/05, sam sherlock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: further more part of my stratergy is too use some kind of php sniffer script ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
