RE: compatibility

> You do realise CSS is optional, and a fully conformant browser will also
> render your "get a conformant browser" warning.
>

yes, which is why I stated *may*

If a user chooses to employ a browser which either does not support current
standards, or if they choose not to use the additional advantages that
standards (such as CSS) delivers, that is their privilege and right; my
adding a small note at the bottom of the page suggesting that they may be
due for an up-grade will probably be ignored as quickly and as surely as the
copyright notice.  These users are already fully aware of the status of
their browser - it's strengths and weaknesses and probably also are aware of
why they have chosen to use such an application.  My use of CSS and
Standards will none-the-less ensure that the content (the real reason they
have come to the site) is still accessible, because I have seperated style
from substance.

But in the great big world, there are many, many, many users, not just in
the disabled community (in fact probably NOT in the disabled community) who
none-the-less use the internet and the web daily, often with the software
"given" to them.  They generally are not aware that there are issues such as
"accessibility" and "standards compliance" (only that sometimes web sites
can be "bad" or "useless").  I humbly suggested to try and do something to
educate them and perhaps improve their user experience by using a method
which will appear ONLY when a browser which does not support a three year
old Standard is used (CSS2), and for that I am told I am rude, nagging and
ignorant.

OK, I am all of that and more.  But I see no further need to continue this
thread - as I have said earlier, everyone is entitled to their opinion.  And
despite asking 3 times now, nobody has given me a concrete reason why this
might be considered inaccessible.

JF

Received on Tuesday, 16 July 2002 17:16:22 UTC