222 Comments

• Digg
• Bury

I'm sorry, but that's the most ignorant comment ever. It doesn't matter how much money you have, it takes time and skilled resources to develop a standards compliant browser, which is why nobody has yet developed a fully standards compliant browser yet. There are a finite number of people in this world skilled enough to do this job, and most of them work for other people. It's not something easy to do, or it would have been done already.

• Reply

• Digg
• Bury

This article (?) is not really "news". This is just a short rant/plea asking web designers to "do the right thing".It is futile to ask them to do anything other than what they have been doing for the past half dozen years. They will go where the tools lead them, not the other way around.It is tools not words that shape the way WYSIWYG-focussed web site editors/designers create and style their content. The only thing that changes inertia in this area is ultimately tools. Standards are the penultimate thing or the starting point, not the thing that drives the masses.He should have appealed to tool writers or written one himself, if he really wanted to make a difference and cause a change. He should have pitched his plea to tool developers, not site designers.Developers are the producers in this scenario, and, though it sounds weird - web site developers are merely consumers in most cases. Web site designers use what software is available, and that software creates the site according to the commands they give it and a few snippets of original CSS.

• Reply

• Digg
• Bury

"I also like to enclose a 'get firefox' icon linking to getfirefox.com....."Hell, give the the "Get firefox with google toolbar" button. Google will give you 99 cents for every install.

• Reply

• Digg
• Bury

I totally bury this, since the main cause of web design problems is how far we're going to follow standards. We, the developers and web designers are sometimes got stuck on the total supports of web standards. CSS 2 for example, is quite impossible to follow 100%. Do current browsers support CSS aurals and W3C WCAG accessibilities? Not yet! Even web browser produced by W3C itself such as Amaya doesn't have support for this.Also by the fact that supports for 100% CSS 2 standards (excluding aural) are yet to be proven for other than IE browsers such as Firefox 2.0 and Opera 9. I'm also not IE fans, since IE has been famous for implementing many non-standard behaviors and what's the worst is the changing behavior from IE 6 to IE 7, no more hacks. Try to hack IE 7 just like IE 6? It won't work!Just read this IE blog: <a class="user" href="http://blogs.msdn.com/ie&quot;&gt;http://blogs.msdn.com/ie&lt;/a&gt;Guys, always try to be objective! :)

• Reply

• Digg
• Bury

Where the f**k did you read that. I went to the link to the W3C Browser statistics that YOU gave and i found this quote:"Browsers that count for less than 0.5% are not listed.W3Schools is a website for people with an interest for web technologies. These people are more interested in using alternative browsers than the average user. The average user tends to use Internet Explorer, since it comes preinstalled with Windows. Most do not seek out other browsers.These facts indicate that the browser figures below are not 100% realistic. Other web sites have statistics showing that Internet Explorer is used by at least 80% of the users."

• Reply

• Digg
• Bury

plz more compliant browser campaign. ie is a crime agains web designer. instead of making everything back to normal and conformance with w3c standard they write hack and wrapper for bugs. and there is even method for fixing bug with bug lol. _ , * , expression(), filter. and so it goes...

• Reply

• Digg
• Bury

Start coding in .NET. Last time I checked not to many large corporations support standards compliant browsers. Probably why they don't care...

• Reply

• Digg
• Bury

Hope that IE8 will take into account all current gaps!

• Reply