|
|
Posted by Neredbojias on 10/29/07 20:52
Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Mon, 29 Oct 2007 19:32:36 GMT
dorayme scribed:
>> And lastly, I'm not one of those who subscribe to the "least
>> common denominator approach" to web page creation just to strictly
>> satisfy certain concepts which are arguable to begin with.
>
> Presumably "just to satisfy certain concepts" indicates you think
> it a dumb trivial clerical obsessive motive. Otherwise why use
> these words?
>
> The web author who tries hard to make his pages as assessable as
> possible, including the crucial 'degrading well' property, is not
> necessarily exhibiting a psychological fault. He could be
> motivated by a desire to make his pages as assessable as
> possible. There is a crucial difference. One is a rational thing,
> the other a irrational one.
An author _should_ try to make his pages as accessible as possible, but
sacrificing popular and versatile utility for coverage of uncommon
conditions and situations is just plain dumb. Do you still consider
Netscape 4.xx in your work? I'm sure there's still a few diehards out
there...
The real idea is you do what you can. If I have to concede a little
semantics to a page-enhancing preload, it would be totally idiotic not to
do so.
--
Neredbojias
Just a boogar in the proboscis of life.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|