On Tue, 31 Dec 2002, Geoffrey S. Mendelson wrote: > Guy Cohen wrote: > > Surely you are joking? To make a site (as complex as it is) to be compliant > > with all browsers (or rfcs) is, roughly estimated, 5% more work to someone > > who knows what he's doing (i.e. any second level programmer in India, Europa, > > USA (though more expensive), Australia and so on). > > What? You think that they don't have the same problem in those countries? > There simply aren't enough GOOD people to go around, so the world is full > of technicaly second and third rate web designers. > > However people don't use a web site based upon how good it is technicaly, > and by our own admission on this list 95% or more of the people out there > wouldn't know one if it crawled out of the screen and bit them. :-)
http://myway.com/ This is an example of a simple site that is proud of that fact. Note "this page took xxx seconds" Advertise the good features of your site. "this page works with any browser", "works with a palm-pilot", "ready-for-google", "accessible", "html4.0", etc. One feature that I can't find a way to express in a positive manner is "doesn't take extra CPU". Read: I try to stay away from nana, ynet, and the sort because they qre not only slow to load, but also slow to maintain. If I keep 5 or 6 pages of them open, they make their toll of my CPU and memory. "no dual pentuim 5 required"? [too technical, and will get out-dated] -- Tzafrir Cohen mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.technion.ac.il/~tzafrir ================================================================= To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
