Re: Microsoft bootlicker sues Netscape

[Sujal Shah <sujal@jhu.edu>]

On Mon, 27 Apr 1998, Dan Strychalski wrote:

> Differential treatment based on choice of browser -- as if everyone
> *could* choose their browser -- may not be quite as heinous as
> differential treatment based on skin color, but these folks ain't doin' it
> otta the kindness of their hearts.

But you can choose that.  It's not enforced upon you.  And again it boils
down to the intent of the page, NOT the fact that such checks are used.

[A LOT SNIPPED]

> Standards-conformant browsers work fine with screen reading programs and
> Braille rendering devices. That is a major concern of the standards bodies
> and, I know from participation in Lynx-dev list discussions, the designers
> of *some* browsers. One page for everybody, no ifs, ands or buts. A blind
> person might want to download an image or graphic and later ask someone to
> describe it. One page for everybody.

There are several features which cannot be rendered by Lynx, for example
(I'm just choosing it as a least common denominator).

For example, the following HTML standard components cause navigation
problems on Lynx:

1. Frames
2. Java
3. JavaScript (it isn't ignored properly by Lynx) - I'm not sure if this
is standard HTML actually (the SCRIPT tag)
4. Tables (lynx has a few problems with them being embedded, I believe)
5. Image submits on Forms don't render correctly


THose are just a few.  As a site designer, you want to ensure that the
browsing experience is the same for each user.  If you have a site which
depends heavily on Java front ends to a Database, for example, you're not
going to ignore the other people out there who have Java turned off or
don't have Java support in their browser.


> Who did I say was conspiring with whom? You demonstrate quite capably that
> even plain text can appeal to instincts and emotions rather than to
> intellect.

How am I doing this?  Your statement that scripts "like this take control
away from the consumer" or something like that implies some type of
conspiracy or agenda.  I am saying that there isn't and one can see that
objectively.  

We make these inferior/superior judgements all the time with regards to
products all of the time.  Cars, televisions, computers, etc. all get that
label, and it DOESN'T imply some sort of agenda, but just that in the
author's opinion, you have a browser which doesn't support the features he
wants.

Sujal

>  
> But we digress, though not much.
>  
> > Opera, Netscape, and competition forever.
>  
> Of course. I said Lynx forEVER, not for EVERYBODY. Though that *would*
> solve a few problems. And ain't it funny how those developers keep
> plugging away without being in competition with anybody....
>  
> Dan Strychalski                                 dski@cameonet.cameo.com.tw
> Any sufficiently slick commercial gimmickry is indistinguishable from progress.
> 

------ Sujal Shah ---- sujal@jhu.edu

   http://dan.hcf.jhu.edu/sujal/

PGP Public Key: finger sujal@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu
		            or
                http://dan.hcf.jhu.edu/sujal/