Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 18.104.22.168
Forum Moderators: open
Still, I wonder if I'll be asked to shell out another $30.
Oh, and I particularly liked Monte Hurd's admonishment for the other browsers to not focus on standards but rather follow Microsoft's lead. Yeesh. I sure hope that's not a representative sentiment. ...
The advice to follow Microsoft's lead may make serious designers' toes curl. It sets the teeth on edge... but it's pragmatic, sadly.
My 5 cents about all these W3C vs MSIE stories:
I think that we should look into future. Current MS position in browser market will not stay the same, I'm sure in this. And following standards seems to be the rigth way to fit into future's plan, and maybe even make it come closer.
After all, IE is getting closer to W3C specs in it's latest release. But it saved backward compatibility with it's elder versions, which is the reason that lots of developers don't even know (or bother themselves to get into) the latest changes in this area.
So they are the ones who should be blamed in this case.
Maybe we will start seeing Opera as standard equipment on some models.
Is there an accepted way to make suggestions to Opera about features?
As for IE vs. W3C, it's a tough call. IE is king, and you have to go where the market is.
That said, they do have pretty decent support for the W3C standards. IMHO, that pushes the ball back into our court -- the developers. If we develop web sites that use W3C standard tags, rather that write IE-Only stuff, it won't matter what browser you're on. Just because a scrolling marquee tag exists doesn't mean you have to use it. (on a side note, please don't -- it's damned annoying!).
If we'd had the equivalent of the w3c 10 years ago, would TBL have bothered working on his www, or just concentrated on contributing to the Semantic Gopher(tm)?