Re: Re: phpsadness - P.C. shmee seee.

On 11-06-05 02:25 PM, Richard Riley wrote:

Ashley Sheridan<ash@ashleysheridan.co.uk> writes:

I think his point is that a lot of websites ignorantly stop browsers not on their list of compatible ones, and end up blocking browsers that would work perfectly well, just the original developer either wasn't aware or didn't care. This used to be in the form of Javascript detecting if a browser was IE, and if it wasn't, assuming blindly it was Netscape Navigator. Now Fx seems to be in that position, and many sites ignore perfectly good browsers like Chrome, Safari, Opera& Konqueror to name a few. All of these are modern browsers, yet they will be blocked by stupid code.

Ignorant blocking is a different matter and I would agree. Blocking because someone is using out of date or incapable browsers is another issue. It is the latter, and specifically something with a rich UI that requires secure connections like FB that I am discussing.

Secure connection and rich UI should not in any way tread on the other's role and responsibility. Authentication and authorization control security, not the UI. If the UI controls the level of security then the solution is broken. A well designed website should be navigable with a screen reader without any of the DHTML and Ajax bits. That some sites aren't, is just pure laziness. Information is information, websites just present the information and it can be presented in multiple ways. Progressive enhancement should be able to take a plain vanilla webpage and blingify it, while leaving a navigable website via traditional means. Cheers, Rob. -- E-Mail Disclaimer: Information contained in this message and any attached documents is considered confidential and legally protected. This message is intended solely for the addressee(s). Disclosure, copying, and distribution are prohibited unless authorized.