Re: [WSG] accesability and backwards compatibility - WAS [Hi there!]

[heretic]

> requirement; I have said that if they want an accessible site written in CSS
> they can't have it looking exactly the same in older browsers that don't
> support CSS 2.0 unless I use 'old skool' presentation techniques. Has anyone
> else run into this problem? I suspect there are plenty of people, I'd be
> interested to hear what thoughts others had on this subject. 

I use a wording trick when dealing with this issue: I say "very old
browsers are supported via graceful degradation". Supported is a
positive word and doesn't imply that the site will "break" in old
browsers.

The other thing is to get some idea of browser usage in your target
market. If your site - for whatever reason - has a huge proportion of
users with an old browser, it will be worth putting more effort into a
nicer degradation for that browser.

But I would sacrifice future-robust design for the sake of supporting
old and busted browsers. Roads are not optimised for horse and cart,
after all.

h

-- 
--- 
--- The future has arrived; it's just not 
--- evenly distributed. - William Gibson
**
The discussion list for  http://webstandardsgroup.org/

 See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
 for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
**

Re: [WSG] accesability and backwards compatibility - WAS [Hi there!]

[Patrick H. Lauke]

wayne wrote:

It’s for a design agency who is now 
saying that this is a requirement;


And that's the crux of the argument: if the project documentation 
clearly states that the site must work and look same/similar even in 
older browsers, then that's what you've got to deliver. I always make a 
point of clarifying exactly, even before taking on a job, what minimum 
spec I'm developing for. Based on that, you make your choice:


a) IE5+, Netscape6+, etc: CSS driven layout, minimal styles fed to older 
browsers; site is still usable and accessible in old user agents, just 
not pretty;
b) must support Netscape4.x (even in terms of look and feel): clean 
table based "holder", most of the rest still done via CSS;


 I have said that if they want an
accessible site written in CSS they can’t have it looking exactly the 
same in older browsers that don’t support CSS 2.0 unless I use ‘old 
skool’ presentation techniques.


Keep in mind that even in the days before this whole CSS-driven layout 
renaissance, it was possible to create fairly accessible sites. 
Table-based layout does not necessarily mean that accessibility has to 
take a back seat. Sure, you *should* use CSS, and only *should* use 
tables for tabular data, but if you don't, then WCAG 1.0 still has a few 
tips and then sends you on your merry way.


Has anyone else run into this problem? I 
suspect there are plenty of people, I’d be interested to hear what 
thoughts others had on this subject.


As I mentioned above, it comes down to clearly stating client/agency 
expectations. The project documentation needs to be crystal clear about 
what platforms/browsers the site needs to work under, and on which it 
has to also LOOK good. Whether you then choose to go for CSS-driven or 
table-based is strongly influenced by these factors. And even layout 
tables can be accessible, if used wisely and sparingly.


--
Patrick H. Lauke
_
re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively
[latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.]
www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk
http://redux.deviantart.com

**
The discussion list for  http://webstandardsgroup.org/

See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
**

RE: [WSG] accesability and backwards compatibility - WAS [Hi there!]

[wayne]

Hi 

 

I am having a similar problem with a site
I am developing. I have tried to make it XHTML and CSS compliant. The problem I
am having other than minor discrepancies between browsers is that in Safari and
IE on OSX 9.0 and maybe even some others, the whole layout goes skew-whiff. Should
I even concern myself with this? It’s for a design agency who is now
saying that this is a requirement; I have said that if they want an accessible site
written in CSS they can’t have it looking exactly the same in older
browsers that don’t support CSS 2.0 unless I use ‘old skool’ presentation
techniques. Has anyone else run into this problem? I suspect there are plenty
of people, I’d be interested to hear what thoughts others had on this
subject.

 

Cheers

 

Wayne

 

w: www.freelance-developer.co.ok

e: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 

 









From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Maarten Stolte
Sent: 21 June 2005 20:51
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Hi there!



 

Hi,

also note that when using XHTML, say with help from Designing with Webstandards
from Jeffrey Zeldman, you can make a site that looks great in newer browsers,
and also works in older browsers...

Maarten

Erica Jean wrote: 


 
  
  
  Thanks to both of you for the
  links :) 
  
  
   
  
  
  I really appreciate it ^^ 
  
  
   
  
  
  ---Original
  Message---
  
  
   
  
  
  
  From: Brian Cummiskey
  
  
  Date: 06/21/05
  15:31:52
  
  
  To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
  
  
  Subject: Re: [WSG]
  Hi there!
  
  
  
   
  
  
  Erica Jean wrote:
  
  
   
  
  
  > 
  
  
  > Is there somewhere I could
  download older browsers for testing by chance?
  
  
   
  
  
   
  
  
  http://www.oldversion.com/program.php?n=msie
  
  
  http://wp.netscape.com/download/archive/
  
  
   
  
  
   
  
  
  **
  
  
  The discussion list
  for  http://webstandardsgroup.org/
  
  
   
  
  
    See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
  
  
    for some hints on posting
  to the list & getting help
  
  
  **