[thelist] Site redirect check : old browser

[.jeff]

mark,

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: From: Mark Cheng
:
: Actually there should be a button on the
: bottom of the nobrows page - "take me to
: the site anyway" or some such thing.
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

what's going to keep the redirect from kicking them back into the "browser
compliance complaint" page or are you going to have two versions?  if two
versions, then people are going to be passing around links to the text
version to people that are likely capable of viewing your "standards
compliant" version.  what then?  does that matter to you?

what's more, buttons should not be used as navigation -- that goes against
accessibility guidelines.

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: 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.
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

noble goal.  however, intertwining this goal with the wasp initiative is not
necessary.

if you were truly separating style from content (ie, storing the content in
text files that were included or within a database) then you wouldn't need
to go to the trouble of building two versions of the site.  on top of that,
you could have specially tailored templates for the delivery of the content
depending on the user agent requesting the page.

for example, it took me all of about an hour and a half to go through the
process of "skinning" all of evolt.org for avantgo, an offline web service
for palm users.

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: 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.
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

don't go for the same layout.  let older browsers view the page however the
browser renders it.  just do your part to make sure it's still usable (ie,
no black text on a black background) for older browsers.

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: I am coding beyond concern for older browsers (actually
: opera 511 has probs with some of the code in the site
: as well!).
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

why?  they won't see the stylesheet for the document like newer browsers,
but they shouldn't have any problem flowing some <div>-wrapped text in the
window.  it may not look the same but it's accessible and usable.  in fact,
before you had your redirect working properly i found the page to be more
enjoyable in nn3 than i did in ie5.

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: However, I care about those older browsers - enough so
: that they don't try and render the "latest standards
: compliant" site.
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

what is there about the "latest standards compliant" site that is going to
be problematic?  when responding to this please do so from your own
experience, not from what you've read elsewhere.  if you can't think of
anything, then maybe there really isn't as big of a problem as you think.

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: I don't want them to get JS errors
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

javascript has nothing to do with w3c compliance.  it's a simple enough
matter to make sure that older browsers don't get any javascript errors.
it's up to you the programmer to take the necessary measures to eliminate
those problems.  this is not a valid excuse to use a redirect for older
browsers.

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: 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.
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

are you really going to maintain two entirely separate versions of the site?

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: > 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.
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

i don't think that's what aardvark was saying at all.  i think he was trying
to make a point about using javascript to redirect browsers.

for example, one of the responses you got the user mentioned lynx.  the
reason the redirect didn't work is because lynx is a text-based browser.  it
doesn't support javascript.  what's more, aardvark made his point even more
clear when he said, "- and then i turned of JS and enjoyed the linearized
pages...".  his point, imo, is that your site works fine for older browsers.
remove that silly redirect - save everyone's time (yourself included).

thanks,

.jeff

http://evolt.org/
jeff at members.evolt.org
http://members.evolt.org/jeff/