> It seems to me that the web developer/designer community spends a huge > amount of time whinging about the browser developers and > their product's > non-compliance, when the answer to the problem lies in their > own hands.
The onus is shared between content developers, browser developers, users and clients, actually... > Our apparent willingness to jump through testing/bug-fix > hoops because of > the newest browser offering from some spotty youths in a > garage in St Kilda, > beggars belief. And what browser would that be then? > We could clearly state that as a community we > write/develop for a > list of acceptable browsers which comply to standards (we're > just going to > have to live wiht IE - market forces). Ah...so already here, you're making a compromise with the IE clause. Cute. Strong words to start with, but then watered down... > Hopefully > non-compliant browsers > would simply not be developed, because the pages would break > in it. Were it not for your IE clause, that may almost be true. > As far as backward compatability is concerned we should support older > browsers but for a set period. Browser software is, by and large free, > upgrading is easy, there is little excuse for not upgrading > to a compliant > browser. However, there is also little need as we spend hours > jiggling code > so that old, non-compliant browsers, can read the pages. If > you can read the > pages why change your browser. I think we need to make a clear distinction here: if by backwards compatibility you're referring to the *visual* layout of pages etc, then I agree...we should not carry on accommodating old, non-compliant browsers. However, in terms of accessibility, we need to ensure that, within reason, pages at least work (content readable, navigation working, etc) in older browsers *within reason*. > People would change browsers if they kept on getting jumbled, > unreadable > pages. Oh...a hardliner. Unfortunately, where these tough ideas (still, softened by your previous IE clause) meet the reality of clients and market driven forces, there's bound to be problems... > The developer community can take a stand here and have some > real input to > the future of browser technology. Idealistic, but...unless you're going to get consensus from each and every web developer out there, it's not going to work. Clients will just go off and find developers with less hardline attitudes, the ones that need the money to flow in, and bend to the will of the ones who pay the bills at the end of the day. > > Hottest day of the year so far, and I'm pissed off trying to > fix a lump of > code that is apparently compliant but breaks in one browser > because some > halfwit can't be bothered to develop compliant software. For > god's sake I > could be sailing!! Design (in all fields and disciplines) is about creatively working around constraints... > Having dangled my coat for someone to stand on I wait with > baited breath. :) There ya go ;) Patrick ________________________________ Patrick H. Lauke Webmaster / University of Salford http://www.salford.ac.uk ***************************************************** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *****************************************************
