aardvark, I really appreciate the time you've spent. couple of points and the beginning of a debate?? :) Mark >> >>>- there is no link to proceed anyway... >> >> there is on the non complying browser page. > >no there wasn't...were you using a document.write? Actually there should be a button on the bottom of the nobrows page - "take me to the site anyway" or some such thing. > >> >>>- "These standards are designed to ensure that the web surfing >> >>>experience is consistent across all browsers, and computer types." >> >>>well, then why won't it work in NN3? >> >> NN3 is not standards compliant. > >well, that's a matter of perspective... it will render compliant HTML >2.0 and 3.2 pages quite nicely... what you mean is that it's not >HTML 4.01 compliant, which makes sense, since it was released >well before HTML 4.01... *however*, your wording says 'consistent >across all browsers," which is my point... i read that far and said, >"well, then, why can't i see it? clearly this is wrong, or they are >clueless..." > Fair point. The wording should be clearer - browsers should include aural browsers etc. thanks for the comments >don't confuse standards with coding beyond what browsers can >handle... you can still code compliant pages that degrade well... >what you are doing is coding to compliance beyond concern for >older browsers, which makes me wonder if you are doing it just >because you can, or if you are doing it because it's easier than >degrading nicely... > Actually, what I am doing is coding to standards designed to separate style from content (HTML 4.01, CSS (including CSSP), ECMA and DOM). My objective is to fully separate design from content (that includes using no tables to achieve positioning of major design elements) to get the massive benefit that brings from a maintenance and redesign point of view. as a newbie, from my reading of various articles (including evolt and A List Apart), life is a lot simpler doing that than trying to get the exact same layout on NN4x and ie, let alone anything before that. I am coding beyond concern for older browsers (actually opera 511 has probs with some of the code in the site as well!). However, I care about those older browsers - enough so that they don't try and render the "latest standards compliant" site. I don't want them to get JS errors and I definitely don't want their browser to crash if they hit the site. However, if they choose to try and render it - then they have made the choice. If they don't want to upgrade their browsers for free - I'm not forcing them to - they can go to the text only site and get a subset of the info available. >ironically, as you get older in the browser chain, you're less likely >to get the JS support you'll need to redirect the users... > Excellent point. - I need to put a warning in the site to cover that. Thanks This email may be confidential and contain commercially sensitive information. Only the intended recipient may access or use it. If you are not the intended recipient please delete this email and notify us promptly. We use virus scanning software but exclude all liability for viruses or similar in this email or any attachment.