On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Chris Benson wrote: > On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 12:10:51PM +0200, Robin Berjon wrote: > > > > After eliminating bots and everything under 0.1%, my logs give me > > Gecko+KHTML at 17% and IE5+ at 83%. The rest doesn't exist. This means you > > can reasonably start thinking about XHTML 1.1 Strict with some good CSS (as > > eg w3.org). > > But surely that's because the elite lynx and w3m[*] users > (a) d/load only the index.html (not the 75 images) then > (b) leave, vowing never to come back to a site that doesn't work. > > It's sort of a self-fulfilling prophesy ... try using e.g. > http://www.pcworld.co.uk/ in anything except IE for a taster: > - lynx and w3m: no chance > - NS7: links don't work then crashes > - Moz1.2: hangs > - Konqueror: "tabbed" areas aren't visible then the tabs disappear > > Class act -- I won't be back there again. So in their logs everything > except IE "doesn't exist" :-(
netscape 4.7 works just. > > [*] insert non-IE browser of choice > -- Bob Walker http://www.randomness.org.uk/ To what accuracy do we know the number of the beast?
