Terrence Wood wrote: > John Foliot wrote: >> semi-credible stats showing that 4% of users cannot (do not?) support >> JavaScript [http://www.thecounter.com/stats/2007/March/javas.php] > > Granted, this appears to be more reliable than 99.9% - but isn't > javascript required in order for thecounter.com to gather stats, or > do they use web bugs? > > I think it is (semi) safer to say 4% of visitors to sites using > thecounter.com counters do not have javascript enabled =) >
No argument, which is why I said semi-credible... like most web stats they are subject to numerous variables. However, for the sake of discussion, they can at least be referenced by all, unlike the incredulous 99.99% number I was questioning. JF ******************************************************************* List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *******************************************************************
