In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, jon wrote: > I don't have anything against the Javascript requirement though (Sorry > Lynx users, this isn't the 80s anymore).
I have to dissent here. Remember that: 1) Running JS is the cause of basically every browser security hole I've seen. While I don't do it all the time, I often surf with JS turned off. (I understand there's a UI bug floating around out there to have a "toggle scripts" button so JS could be turned on and off and will without going into the menus, which would help.) 2) The content of the <NOSCRIPT> tag isn't restricted to "Sorry, please upgrade your browser", contrary to what you might believe from observation of the Web. If people are going to make gratuitous use of JS, it's perfectly reasonable to ask them to use <NOSCRIPT> for accessibility purposes. > Its the Windows Media and > QuickTime requirements that blow my mind. And the foolishness marches on...evidently people haven't learned anything from the lawsuit after the last fiasco. -- Chris Hoess
