In a message dated 12/6/2001 12:53:20 PM Central Standard Time, rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org writes:> Bite the bullet and make it look good for hoi polloi; I'm sure the But, as I said with regret, you keep doing the same thing over and over again, hence my repeated comments. I am aware that you are doing your best to make something work on Netscape that works fine on other things and that is a nice feature, but backwards. If most people use Netscape, then the right way to do things is to get it good on Netscape and then do as much as possible to get it looking good on other browsers. You won't succeed, of course, since -- as you point out -- nobody plays entirely by the putative rules (else how could they have proprietary or thumb-your-nose public domain software). But at least you are shooting for the largest participation. Of course, telling people that the system they use is crap is probably not good PR either, especially if it is basically working fine for them and what you have to offer is expensive and/or unreliable. All of which is apparently moot, since Netscape is said to be hardly more used than a variety craftsman jobbies and it is IE that needs working to. So the same remarks apply mutatis mutandis. : <Understand that Netscape 4.* *DRASTICALLY*VIOLATES* several major standards.> If Netscape is the generally used browser, IT IS the standard and all the committees in the world saying otherwise are just breaking wind (as witness the careful attention that others pay them -- and also the fact that they did not take actual use into consideration when they set up their -- snicker -- standards.) |