Let's get one thing straight here. When I talk about supporting and not
supporting v4 (and below) browsers, I DON'T mean creating pages that can't
be read at all with these versions. I'm talking about going to huge
lengths to make pages THAT LOOK THE SAME. Which a lot of developers are
still doing, and which we were doing until a little while ago.
It's bad practice. Why? Because if pages look fine to users using old
browsers they'll never bother to upgrade. Why should they? And in 2
years time we'll all still be moaning about having to support Netscape 4!!
But if users find that although they can -access- the information using
an old browser it looks much better and is easier to read in a newer
browser, then maybe, just maybe, some of them will be spurred into action.
Those stuck with old systems should still be able to access the
information though. All our pages are perfectly readable in Lynx, to take
it to an extreme.
Oh, and by the way, the Web Standards Project has been running a Browser
Upgrade Initiative for some time now, so I'm not the only one to think
this way: http://www.alistapart.com/stories/tohell/
Kat
On Fri, 12 Jul 2002, Charles Christacopoulos wrote:
|
| How many times have I hit my head on the brick wall (called Standards) when I
| talk about potential and actual students with economic "disabilities" who cannot
| afford the latest.
|