That's part of the problem.
On Monday, Nov 3, 2003, at 22:35 Asia/Jerusalem, Shlomi Fish wrote:
I regret being so blunt but, no, we are not going to change our website in
the near future. We have developed an amazing website,
"amazing"? By this do you mean full of non-portable bells and whistles, and other idiosyncracies? Sorry, but that's not an amazing web-site according to my book. A good web-site is either simple and clean, or includes standard-compliant, portable embelishments. (which are usually not necessary).
Actually, a site doesn't have to be clean, and can have all the bells and whistles you want and still work with mozilla. Hell, you can even make a site which is full of bells and whistles and is still accessible, if you know what you are dong. IMO, telling web-masters that their site must be simple in order to work with mozilla is shooting ourselves in the foot- you will get the same response that you got here "then why bother?". They think that Mozilla is limited and won't even try, although in fact mozilla has a few tricks up it's sleeves that IE can't handle to save it's life.
Like Leumi said: W3C has standards, but IE doesn't support them. As such, it makes no sense, and justly so, to use them. Let's face it, if it were possible to design sites that worked on IE, be flashy, AND were standard complient, we would have a strong case. Is it possible?
Shachar
-- Shachar Shemesh Open Source integration consultant Home page & resume - http://www.shemesh.biz/
================================================================= To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
