If we are talking IE: Isn’t the
problem is that Microsoft is going to integrate its next version of IE directly
into its operating system, which maybe an issue unto itself? Right or
wrong they don’t want to spend the money to patch or upgrade the current browser.
Longhorn (the name of the next operating system) keeps getting postponed.
In the meantime, I think as a web
developer, one designs for the browser their users use. It would
take a special interest group, maybe one for some disability, to publicize that
using IE is inaccessible to them, and since IE is fairly accessible to most
groups, I don’t see that happening.
Nancy Johnson
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Jamie Mason
Sent: Tuesday, June
08, 2004 12:24 PM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: [WSG] Action to force
browser developers to clean up their ac t
Hi,
I'd be happiest if an IE7.x came
that was completely standards compliant and auto updated itself (without a
facility to disable this) and if MS wanted to add any exclusive extras then
they did, but that everything else rendered exactly as the technology creators
intended. They get their extra stuff to try and win extra users with, and
developers who choose not to use those features still have their pages rendered
properly and if they do, those features didn't affect the "non IE
excluisve" components.
Hope that made sense :/
Jamie Mason: Design
-----Original Message-----
From: Nick Gleitzman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 08 June 2004 16:57
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [WSG] Action to force
browser developers to clean up their act
On Wednesday, June 9, 2004, at 01:41 AM,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> If we are going to make sites that only work in
certain browsers why
> not just
> code to IE's standards and not
bother with the obscure browsers like
> firefox
> and opera. That
way we don't need standards at all! I can have my
> marquee
> tag back and my ActiveX
controls - Ill be able to do all kinds of
> great things.
> After all nearly
everyone uses IE...
>
> Seriously though, If you
are going to take this hardline attitude by
> purposefully excluding users
of certain browsers then you may as well
> do what I was saying
above. Don't loose site of the objective - with
> standards we are
> trying to let more browsers
work with our sites not less. Don't get
> too bitter
> about IE people it's not good
for your health.
No, no - I'm not suggesting for a second we should
*only* develop for
IE, or any other certain browsers!
Just the opposite - I make a point
of delivering my clients' message
to the maximum number of visitors.
And I'm not bitter; just realistic.
That's why I say 'IE is here to
stay'. Thanks to the many gurus
around, we have a whole menu of hacks
available so we *can* deliver
Standards-driven sites to non-compliant
browsers.
I just think we have to keep an eye on the past, even
as we move
forward. Someone said in a recent
post on another thread, 'IE/Mac is no
longer being developed, so it's a
dead duck.' Huh? Did all the IE/Mac
users just stop, there and then,
when that news was announced? No - and
that's why I'll keep hacking for,
and testing in, the widest possible
range of browsers I can. I owe it
to my clients.
100% compliant browsers. Write once, publish anywhere.
It's the dream
of Standards, right? I'm all for
it; I'll do my bit, and more. But it's
not the real world - not yet.
Nick
___________________________
Omnivision. Websight.
http://www.omnivision.com.au/
*****************************************************
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the
list & getting help
*****************************************************
