> It's been a while since I've had to include support for IE5 (and how > great that feels), Before not supporting any browser, you should first ask what will it take to support it? Even if the number don't otherwise justify supporting IE5, if the fix is simple enough (and adding two or three text-aligns is very simple) then why not?
I am comfortable supporting old browsers by sending them unstyled content; or frankly just drawing a line in the sand about testing and supporting old browsers. There are good reasons why users should not be encouraged to keep using really old browsers (and supporting them is encouragement). In particular security is a major issue - older browsers may not have strong enough encryption (eg. IE5.0), lack newer security features like anti-phishing alerts and vendors eventually stop patching old browsers so security holes just sit there waiting to be hit. Plus there's timeframe to consider. IE5.5 is two entire versions behind and was superceded many years ago - heck, IE6 is an old browser! So it's not like we're being nasty to a version that has just been superceded... it's been out of date for a *very* long time. Plus to support old browsers you end up running multiple virtual machines or whatever... there's overhead to consider. So even if it's easy to fix problems for IE5.0 I wouldn't do it unless a client specifically paid me to do so. cheers, Ben -- --- <http://www.200ok.com.au/> --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson ******************************************************************* List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *******************************************************************
