Posted by Mika on 11/28/07 08:25

"Bergamot" <bergamot@visi.com> wrote in message
news:5r4b8rF12s7meU1@mid.individual.net...
> rf wrote:
>> "Bergamot" <bergamot@visi.com> wrote in message
>> news:5r3oodF12u6n2U1@mid.individual.net...
>>
>>> Your statements insisting it's strictly UK is obviously false. BTW, if
>>> it were true, you wouldn't have a .com domain name, but a .uk domain.
>>
>> Don't worry, Berg.
>>
>> They have hived off to c.i.w.a.site.design
>
> Yeah, I noticed. They probably didn't consider that the same people
> subscribe to both ciwas-d and alt.html groups. :)

Someone here helpfully suggested that group would be best placed to answer
future queries. You can find that suggestion in this thread. Then we take
that advice, and someone else has a complaint with it. That's fine! It's
funny!

>> There are some !important caveats to the use of the site though:
>>
>>> (Opera limitations on div widths prevent it working currently)
>
> I can't imagine where they came up with this. More cluelessness, no
> doubt. :)

Our streetscape on Oxford Street is very wide, and it scrolls from one end
of a very wide div to the other. You only see a small portion of it through
the window, but it is there Opera is the only browser that is incapable of
supporting scrolling of a div that wide.

We know, we could rewrite the entire site from scratch, however when you
balance the cost and time of that with supporting a browser which 1% of the
people *arriving* at our site have, and they all have IE installed anyway if
they wish to use it after consulting our FAQ, then that is the choice we
made. We understand the objections to it, however it was a carefully
considered decision and that is the one we as the designers of our site have
the right to make.

[Back to original message]