> It is interesting to note that M$ has recently been at pains to point out > that it's implementation has the best standards compliance of any browser.
Another FUD campaign. Sarcastically speaking, they implemented some obscure new standard they knew others hadn't bothered with yet, and then shout something about standard compliance, while (so I've heard) not a single of their pages on microsoft.com passes the validator. This is EXTREMELY CHEEKY. > -The DOM is different for EVERY browser there appears to be no > standard that anyone adheres to. (that's the model around which javascript is >built) Tell me what for you *need* javascript? Are you saying that not even the simple stuff like putting text at the bottom of the browser window works the same? Btw, the German government's office for the security in IT recommendation still stands: turn scripting off because the risk is not worth taking. > -Paths to files can be platform dependent. Although "/" is the defined standard > anybody that does development on only M$ systems will never notice/ Well, I'll go to other e-commerce sites then. Very simple. I use my customer leverage as much as I can. They don't care about me being in the 20% non-IE, I don't care about them (and might let them know). As for the company responsible for the site, ignorance is no protection. > -IE is less fussy about closing tags etc So is konqueror I believe. NS 4.x is getting a bit dated now and has been unmaintained for ages. Use a proper validator for your html and be on the safe side. If it doesn't work precisely with 1 out of 6 browsers, you can reasonably say it's the browsers fault. If you absolutely must use the latest obscure feature, well... > So please be careful about what you slag M$ off for. You may be embarassed if > the person is a well informed M$oftie Under the bottom line, I don't think one can possibly lose... ;) Volker
