|
|
Posted by Jonathan N. Little on 03/14/07 14:10
Jon Slaughter wrote:
> "Ed Seedhouse" <eseedhouse@shaw.ca> wrote in message
> news:k41ev2hq0o18cccd74k3pkktbfghc3o1g5@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 13 Mar 2007 07:28:04 -0600, Bergamot <bergamot@visi.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>> but at this point I'm just trying to get something done
>>>> that works for me.
>> Whatever for? Do you intend to be the only visitor?
>>
>> Sort of contradicts the idea behind *publishing* a web site, so far as I
>> can see.
>>
>
>
> No, but you guys seem to think that everyone is like you and don't know how
> to use a mouse or run there screen resolution above 320x200. I'm not going
> to waste my time designing my site for every jack ass that doesn't want to
> use a mouse or turn on javascript. Its just tough if they want to use IE 1
> and not upgrade to IE 7 or firefox. I'll be damned if I'm going to spend 10x
> as long trying to design the site so it will work for every one last
> possibility just so no one is left out. I'm designing the site for me and
> not for them. If no one else in the world knows how to use a mouse but me
> then so be it. I guess I'll be the only vistor. Its also not my fault that
> there are so many differences between browsers that I have to spend 3x as
> much time designing the site just so it works on the main four.
<snip>
Yes it does not make sense to design to accommodate NN4 for MSIE3
vintage browsers where the usage is in the fractions of a percent but
equally it does not make sense not to implement simple design elements
that makes your site flexible and accommodate multiple browsers,
resolutions, methods of access. Most times to accommodate in a design is
not *add* impediments!
--
Take care,
Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|