Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2001 12:12:13 +0100 From: Rahul Siddharthan <rsidd@online.fr> To: Paul Robinson <paul@akita.co.uk> Cc: Nils Holland <nils@tisys.org>, David Johnson <djohnson@acuson.com>, Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org>, chat@FreeBSD.ORG, advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: NatWest? no thanks Message-ID: <20011102121213.D22587@lpt.ens.fr> In-Reply-To: <20011102104858.A47349@jake.akitanet.co.uk>; from paul@akita.co.uk on Fri, Nov 02, 2001 at 10:48:58AM %2B0000 References: <3BE1CC99.D3C8733C@acuson.com> <20011102000921.J54141-100000@jodie.ncptiddische.net> <20011102104858.A47349@jake.akitanet.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Paul Robinson said on Nov 2, 2001 at 10:48:58: > That's my point - that sentiment is what needs to be discussed. Let me try > and bring this thread back screaming and kicking to being on-topic again, > and then let me explain where that little sub-thread went. > > OK, what I was trying to say, is that perhaps it's not the bank's website > that is broken, but our software. Perhaps, just maybe, we should be trying > to adopt those standards, even try and make the rendering engines more > IE-like so that there is a legitimate reason to say they are being 'facist' > when they exclude us. As many have pointed out, IE is not a standard. IE is a moving target. The standards come from W3C, of which Microsoft too is a member. > Where we then started swinging off-topic was as to whether we should just > sit here on our thrones and shout "we're all great, you're not, drop MS now > and come and join us or you're lame", or as to whether we should address all > the usability issues around our preferred platform to make the user > experience more accomodating for more people. Or perhaps we can ask the people who maintain these web pages to stick to the W3C standards. (They're paid for it, it's their job, they should know how to do these things.) Then, if Mozilla doesn't support it, we can start cribbing about Mozilla. In fact, I haven't yet come across an online service which didn't work with a recent version of Mozilla. Maybe I'm lucky. But in any case, it suggests to me that it's not all that hard to do it. Other people, more knowledgeable than me, have already said the same thing. > Anyway, I'm shutting up now, as it's quite obvious that everybody thinks I'm > wrong for even daring to suggest that MS might actually have a reasonably > good product in the form of their browser, and I'm obviously being a heretic > when I say that quite frankly, Mozilla and Konqueror don't match up. The problem is not their browser but their extensions. If these extensions are a good idea, let the W3C endorse them -- that's happened before. And incidentally, "whining" about W3C standard compliance probably does help: MS IE reportedly has been improving in standards compliance greatly, and is at least comparable with Mozilla, and most certainly far ahead of Netscape 4.x, which I haven't needed to use for ages now. I'm not sure why MS is supporting standards in this case -- it goes totally against their grain as displayed in every other aspect of their behaviour -- but it could well be the collective global "whining" about it... To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20011102121213.D22587>