W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-evangelist@w3.org > September 2002

[public-evangelist] <none>

From: Jim Ley <jim@jibbering.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 10:45:03 -0400
Message-ID: <018701c2688f$5dce2c00$ca969dc3@emedia.co.uk>
To: <public-evangelist@w3.org>
ke>
Subject: Re: PCMag ranks the browsers and says IE6 is the best...
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 14:40:47 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200

"Ineke van der Maat" <inekemaa@xs4all.nl>
> In pages that are not looking well in Netscape 4 at all, I wrote a
> sidebar with the text: When you think the page is not looking nice, why
> should not you upgrade to the newest Mozilla version?.
>
> Is this perhaps an idea for your pages too?

I believe this should be a very rare thing to do, people are coming for
your content - ie we trust you on information about the band, whilst we
know we can trust you for browser evangelism, encouraging the general
site author to do the same is unconstructive.

> I only use valid  XHTML 1.1 and CSS.

In which case you SHOULD NOT be sending it as text/html and Netscape 4
will not be even trying to render the document so NN4's handling is
pretty irrelevant, or if you are sending it as text/html, then can I
evangelise the use of W3's recommendations and recommend you use the
correct mime-type. (or a correct version of HTML for text/html.)

> With javascript I send a base
> stylesheet to Netscape 4 and WebTV (is also very bad)

Please do not mis-use javascript in this manner.

Jim.
Received on Monday, 30 September 2002 10:45:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 15 July 2011 00:13:21 GMT