> Isn't it time to say, "we now know what the users use" (even though we
> don't agree with what they use) and completely forget about the rest?

but this has already happened and look where we are at.

> If we all would do this and set our pride aside, I reckon we might have > that dream we have come true!

The idea is not to code for any particular browser - rather to code to the standards and let the browsers that support those standards render the markup. In theory of course we should be able to code and have any user agent render that code correctly. In practice we have to tip our hats to those agents that have partial support and will supply us with the most grumpy feedback from our users. Currently this is IE5.5 and 6 (note that IE5.5 is no longer available due to the MS vs Sun lawsuit) and recently in history Netscape 4.

This divorces us from browser populations - meaning the presentational code we write will be useful well into the future with the minimum of tweaking.

It's not about pride, "whether we all love firebird". it's about the standards. I use FB because it's a good tool for web development - prior to that it was Opera.

If we coded for the most used rendering engine at the moment (Windows) where would we be in 6 months when the next update comes along? IE6 is basically dead in the water development-wise.

I have no idea the exact numbers of the different agents that use my site - and it doesn't really bother me. This is the benefit of standards.

The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/

Reply via email to