As a Mozilla user I come across site after site that takes advantage of non-standard IE extensions that make the page virtually unviewable for me. Of course, trying to develop to cater to all these possibilities does make life a lot more difficult that it may need to be!
-Mike Fowler "I could be a genius if I just put my mind to it, and I, I could do anything, if only I could get 'round to it"
Woodchuck wrote:
it used to be more common to have warnings on websites that say cookies are required. nowadays, these warnings are not there anymore and it's assumed cookies will be available. and if cookies are disabled by the user, and the website requires it, the user will be promptly halted.
i'm coming from a web developer perspective, so i guess what i'm getting at is that it seems to me something is wrong when a website has to cater to non-cookie-enabled browsers/users. this argument can also be extended to other things like browser make/version, javascript (on/off), etc. etc.
is it really harsh to say no cookies = no website nowadays? in my humble opinion, this is no.
[snip]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
