- From: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>
- Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 18:17:26 -0800
- To: Access Systems <accessys@smart.net>, Vadim Plessky <lucy-ples@mtu-net.ru>
- Cc: sethmr@bellatlantic.net, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
At 8:49 PM -0500 12/24/01, Access Systems wrote: >On Tue, 25 Dec 2001, Vadim Plessky wrote: > > Of course, you need to have JavaScript enabled to get this code working :-) > > // but you can't do any on-page browser detection without >JavaScript, anyway. >But Javascript is not normally on in Lynx. (in fact I don't know how to >enable it in Lynx or if it is even possible) Lynx doesn't do JavaScript. This should be considered a serious shortcoming in Lynx, but instead it seems to be viewed as a virtue. I'd really like to see text browser that did JavaScript and CSS. Anyway, the answer there would be a <noscript> fallback intended for browsers which don't do JavaScript or which don't have JavaScript enabled. >I say it again, there should be no assumption what so ever that there is >any user side support for anything. Surely you don't mean "for _anything_". Do you assume client-side support for HTML 2.0? What about HTML 3.2? What about HTML 4.01 Transitional? What about HTML 4.01 Strict? What about CSS level 1? What about CSS level 2? What about ECMAScript? What about DOM? See, we need to assume some level of basic support. Okay, so some browsers won't measure up to it -- but some browsers (such as Lynx) have not been reprogrammed in 5 years. More recent browsers do indeed have some degree of all of the above, so the answer simply is to ask what is the reasonable level of support to expect, and is it fair game to expect someone to be using a reasonable browser when accessing your site? --Kynn -- Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com> http://kynn.com Chief Technologist, Idyll Mountain http://idyllmtn.com Web Accessibility Expert-for-hire http://kynn.com/resume January Web Accessibility eCourse http://kynn.com/+d201
Received on Monday, 24 December 2001 21:33:02 UTC