On 05 Jun 2011 at 16:23, Geoff Shang <ge...@quitelikely.com> wrote: > On Sun, 5 Jun 2011, Richard Riley wrote: > >>> I don't. I just don't want them to lock out my browser just because they >>> don't >>> support it. Many pages which don't work optimally under Lynx can still be >>> read, >>> which is all I'm wanting to do anyway. >> >> They need to or there can be unintentional side affects that will >> reflect badly on them and possibly you. > > Rubbish. All they need to do is what everyone else does and say "This > site may not work well on your browser, we recommend using Internet > Explorer or firefox" (or whatever they support). Then if I choose to use > it, it's on my own head, which is fine by me. > >> If you really want a half arsed user experience then set your browser >> string ;) Would that not work for you? > > It probably would. But this tangent began with the principle of "Use IE > or Firefox" and how we hated sites that said that. It's the principle of > the thing.
Yes. You might (just) be able to justify something really old [1], but Safari 5.0.5? I find that to be a damn cheek. I expect sites to be standards-based. [1] Don't ask me what that means. I've not kept up with what new stuff is around now that wasn't, ten years ago. -- Cheers -- Tim
-- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
