«

Phil Thompson wrote:
> how can i change the check browser behaviour so that users with an Opera
> broswer will go to an alt url to those using IE. at the moment i have the DW
> MX behaviour configured so netscape and non-IE browsers go to an alternative
> url but when viewing the site in Opera it won't refresh to the alternative
> url.
>
>
> this is the code from DW MX:
>
> MM_checkBrowser(4.0,1,2,4.0,2,2,0,'index.htm','../CBIT/index.htm');return
> document.MM_returnValue"
>
>
>
> Phil
>
>
>

96% of browsers in use out there have a very good support for DOM1 and
CSS1. Whenever I do a webpage (not a complex one), I code for these
browsers. For the other 4%, I only check if the content is accessible: I
do not make any extra effort for these browsers to render the layout
like it is in DOM1 and CSS1 compliant browsers.

One day, people have to upgrade their browsers, you know. Otherwise,
you'll always downgrade your whole code to cater for only 4% of users or
do multiple versions of whole sites... which is absurd. Catering for
MSIE 4 and NS 4 users does not make any sense at all in my mind.

DU
--
Javascript and Browser bugs:
http://www10.brinkster.com/doctorunclear/
- Resources, help and tips for Netscape 7.x users and Composer
- Interactive demos on Popup windows, music (audio/midi) in Netscape 7.x
http://www10.brinkster.com/doctorunc...e7Section.html

"DU" <> wrote in message
news:bj2i5i$ads$...
> Phil Thompson wrote:
> > how can i change the check browser behaviour so that users with an Opera
> > broswer will go to an alt url to those using IE. at the moment i have
the DW
> > MX behaviour configured so netscape and non-IE browsers go to an
alternative
> > url but when viewing the site in Opera it won't refresh to the
alternative
> > url.
> >
> >
> > this is the code from DW MX:
> >
> >
MM_checkBrowser(4.0,1,2,4.0,2,2,0,'index.htm','../CBIT/index.htm');return
> > document.MM_returnValue"
> >
> >
> >
> > Phil
> >
> >
> >
>
> 96% of browsers in use out there have a very good support for DOM1 and
> CSS1. Whenever I do a webpage (not a complex one), I code for these
> browsers. For the other 4%, I only check if the content is accessible: I
> do not make any extra effort for these browsers to render the layout
> like it is in DOM1 and CSS1 compliant browsers.
>
> One day, people have to upgrade their browsers, you know. Otherwise,
> you'll always downgrade your whole code to cater for only 4% of users or
> do multiple versions of whole sites... which is absurd. Catering for
> MSIE 4 and NS 4 users does not make any sense at all in my mind.
>

True but my site looked (for want of a better term) **** in Netscape and
Opera so I edited it slightly, but it took away from the IE appearance, so I
had to do this.

> DU
> --
> Javascript and Browser bugs:
> http://www10.brinkster.com/doctorunclear/
> - Resources, help and tips for Netscape 7.x users and Composer
> - Interactive demos on Popup windows, music (audio/midi) in Netscape 7.x
> http://www10.brinkster.com/doctorunc...e7Section.html
>

Phil Thompson wrote:

> "DU" <> wrote in message

>>
>>96% of browsers in use out there have a very good support for DOM1 and
>>CSS1. Whenever I do a webpage (not a complex one), I code for these
>>browsers. For the other 4%, I only check if the content is accessible: I
>>do not make any extra effort for these browsers to render the layout
>>like it is in DOM1 and CSS1 compliant browsers.
>>
>>One day, people have to upgrade their browsers, you know. Otherwise,
>>you'll always downgrade your whole code to cater for only 4% of users or
>>do multiple versions of whole sites... which is absurd. Catering for
>>MSIE 4 and NS 4 users does not make any sense at all in my mind.
>>
>
>
> True but my site looked (for want of a better term) **** in Netscape and
> Opera so I edited it slightly, but it took away from the IE appearance, so I
> had to do this.
>

When you mention Netscape, are you referring to NS 7.1 or are you
referring to NS 4.72? I see a huge difference here. When you're speaking
of Opera, are you referring to Opera 7.11 or to Opera 5.01? Again, I
see a huge difference in all kinds of perspectives (global usage, DOM
and CSS compliance, etc.).

Even if a webpage looks like **** in NS 4.72, if the content is
accessible, if such webpage content can be accessed, then I do not care
about looks, visual layout. What is the most important point in my
perspective is that a webpage complies with W3C web standards and that
standard, normal and reasonable efforts have been deployed to make such
page accessible and usable. And there is a limit to what should be
expected to do for old and non-compliant browsers or web-aware devices,
applications, etc..

Of course, a website should also mention that its code is aimed
at/intended for W3C web standards compliant browsers and that it was
tested with the most popular W3C web standards compliant browsers.

Catering for MSIE 4 and NS 4 (browser versions designed more than 6
years ago) does not make sense.

DU
--
Javascript and Browser bugs:
http://www10.brinkster.com/doctorunclear/
- Resources, help and tips for Netscape 7.x users and Composer
- Interactive demos on Popup windows, music (audio/midi) in Netscape 7.x
http://www10.brinkster.com/doctorunc...e7Section.html