Paul B. Gallagher wrote:
When I complained about bad browser sniffing at one of my favorite
websites:
I've never understood why web designers prefer to waste time writing
several custom versions of their code for several different browsers
instead of just writing one W3C-compliant version, but whatever.
I'll just keep dismissing the useless nag and go on about my life.
tech support wrote back:
The reason why websites tend not to be W3C-compliant is that while
it may be optimal to do so, it is very costly and takes up a lot of
resources.
Unfortunately, we currently do not have sufficient resources to do
so yet. But we'll definitely aim towards improving it and making it
more accessible to everyone.
Sorry for the inconvenience. If you have any other questions, please
let me know!
First time I've heard that one -- it's more expensive to write
W3C-compliant code than to write several custom versions for supported
browsers.
They would have to start over, instead of just changing little things,
here and there, along the way, to the system they have now. Makes sense
to me. I used to know several people with that same story about CSS.
They had hundreds on top of 100's of tables and font tags and always
said, "yeah, I'm going to be getting to learning CSS some day".
_______________________________________________
support-seamonkey mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
