Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 15 of 15
  1. #11
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    I agree with all those above, like a melting pot of everything. I think you should have your sitye accesible to your target audience, i.e if they use netscape, then make it compatible, or just stick with anything as simple as text only, but overall, I agree that this is a great source for the compatibility issues
    >> >: (^) ADION - {spread}

    get hammers

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    I think that you should always try to support both IE and Netscape browsers as well. If not, you'll need to specify it on your first intro page or something and live with the fact that you may not get as many visitors to your site.

    Most of the code is compatible to both browsers. Personnaly I write my code directly using a text editor. Let say I'm kind of a old core writer, this way you don't have to fu.. around with all the messing up code that most WYSIWYG editors.

    Also, there is a lot of new coding features that I'll never use when I know it's not compatible. Usings Javascript, HTML and CSS is enough to get a real nice good looking site. You can also add interactivity with server side scripting such as ASP, PHP, JSP, Perl or by using Flash movies !

    A good site to see a great list of sites for their Design is www.coolhomepages.com .

    See ya !

  3. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    I'm doing my best not to be rude, but you can't spend hours designing for "everyone with every disability." Believe me, I would...but my clients wouldn't enjoy my bill for 80 hours of work so that a site works in lynx.

    You have to come to your own conclusions about who you hope will visit your site, and who to leave behind. Thank god there are no laws requiring special access for people or web designers would go out of business.

    On a more personal note, I'm more of a backend developer, so ASP doesn't matter what the client is, as long as data is returned to the client.

  4. #14
    Senior Member The Old Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Darn..... Here i was floating along fat and happy and G.G. had to go and post this optimizing/html quality thing. Used to be, back in the beginning, i paid special attention to W3C and actually had "Bobby" check my pages before they went 'live'. But time, the rush of more things to do than time to do them in, and a generous portion of overconfidence slowly changed things around. After reading her post, i bounced up to Bobby to test my latest website acquisition (repaired all the broken links, dead pages and took over the wm duties) and promptly got slam-dunked with a page full of Bobby question marks. That's the bad news. The good news is; i got a couple days before the DNS tables update and the site comes up with my name on it instead of the prior wm, so i have time to fix the shortcomings. Thanks, G.G., .... i suppose.... (Grrrrrrrrrrrr)

  5. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Helsinki, Finland
    You might also want to take a look at the 'Viewable with Any Browser Campaign', found here: http://www.anybrowser.org/campaign/

    Did you check the example of an accessible page from that article GG posted? This: http://ken.me.com.au/
    Strange enough it claims to validate with "RDF" and "P3P", things I've never heard of but which still have something to do with W3C. Check the RDF validating, it gives a bunch of warning messages. Oops.
    Q: Why do computer scientists confuse Christmas and Halloween?
    A: Because Oct 31 = Dec 25

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts