On Fri, 12 Jul 2002, Ruth Mason wrote:
> We redesigned our page template, launched in March 2002, using
> browser detection to provide two output versions - one for modern
> browsers using CSS Positioning and optimised for disabled
> access, the other for legacy browsers in tabular format for
> audiences without ready access to (or means to purchase) modern
> browsers. This covers both sides of the accessibility issue.
There is a downside to doing this (not a criticism, just an observation):
1) Such pages can't be cached in shared caches. This means you need to
mark them as uncachble and still lays you open to caches getting it wrong.
It will also wind up the load on your server and reduce browsing speed for
people who have slow links between you and their cache.
2) You have to keep your browser match lists up to date, and decide what
you do about unrecognised browsers. For example I expect my copy of
Mozilla 1.0 could cope with your 'modern browser' version but it looks
like you are serving me the legacy version.
Jon.
--
Jon Warbrick
Web/News Development, Computing Service, University of Cambridge
|