- From: Taylor-Made <taymade@home.com>
- Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 16:36:19 -0600
- To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
I am so frustrated by the way Netscape renders web pages. I still cannot understand why pages can be brought up in Explorer, Opera and some other browsers and look wonderful! Yet Netscape does a hack job of them when it brings the same page(s) up. I hate the fact that we have to code for Netscape as if it were a prima donna. Just my thoughts! Anon *Smile* (really it's just me, Joyce) -----Original Message----- From: Joel Sanda <joelsanda@yahoo.com> To: WAI Interest Group <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org> Date: Friday, March 03, 2000 3:55 PM Subject: Netscape and IE Questions >I have some general "philosophical design questions" >I'd like some feedback on - based upon my experience >as a webmaster. I've built several site that meet WAI >Level A recommendations, and several that do not. What >I'm most interested in, based upon my experience, is >some feedback from developers on these questions. > >Building an accessible site for Internet Explorer is, >in my experience, a piece of cake. With IE's support >of style sheets, I've created sites that don't use >tables for layout. > >But when that same site is viewed in Netscape, the >whole thing falls apart. In fact, I immediately >noticed two problems: the "resize bug" in Netscape >destroyed the site's layout if the window was resized. >Of course, the second is Netscape's poor support of >CSS-P. > >Further, in many cases, the <TITLE> tag was either >ignored by Netscape and/or destroyed the positioning >in the DIV tag. > >Several of us worked on the site for about two months, >trying to reconcile these differences. We eventually >did, but are still exhausted from the effort of having >to recode portions of the site when we tested it in >one of the many versions of Netscape 4.x versions. > >The upshot is this: we had to "water down" our code to >make it work in Netscape, which meant is was less >accessible according to WAI recommendations than >before. While we could have sniffed for browser >version and redirected, that means twice the >maintenance and essentially creating an accessible and >a non-accessible site. > >What are your thoughts on this? I don't think >accessible web design is that problematic for >developers. What is problematic is Netscape. > >While this sounds like Netscape bashing, I think the >discrepancies between IE and Netscape in their support >of W3C and WAI recommendations means developers either >have to build two sites, or build one that is not that >accessible - a rock and hard place. > >Any thoughts? > >Thanks - Joel Sanda >joelsanda@yahoo.com >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. >http://im.yahoo.com > >
Received on Friday, 3 March 2000 17:37:38 UTC