On 3/13/17, TCW <"."> wrote: > On 3/11/2017 2:04 AM, 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. >> > > A good coder, I would imagine, would write a script to parse their > content and replace "Bad Sniffing Code" with "W3C Compliant" code. Test. > Wash, rinse, repeat.
First they'd have to hire a good coder - which they seem unwilling to do Lee _______________________________________________ support-seamonkey mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
