Browser requirements

I'm anticipating a few complaints about the redesign of this and the other associated web sites which use a similar template because users who use Netscape 4 and Internet Explorer 4 cannot view this site as it appears to other users. For Netscape 4 users, the site appears as plain text, so it can still be read for content. For Internet Explorer 4 users, the browser's understanding of the underlying technologies used to create the display of the new site cause things to shift out of place so badly that some of the content becomes hidden.

However, I'm prepared to make that sacrifice, because even though the site has become less accessible for some, it has become more accessible for others.

Most pages on this site now validate as XHTML 1.0 Strict and are for the most part CSS 1.0 Compliant as well. What does this mean?

It means that modern web browsers, such as Mozilla, Netscape 6, IE 5.0, 5.5 and 6.0, IE 5.2 for Mac and Safari should be displaying the site properly. I've used web standards that have been around for 5-6 years (and counting) in the building of the site. However, for years, these standards were either ignored or incorrectly applied in browsers. It is only these modern generations of browsers that are able to properly display web sites built with these standards in mind.

Looking at the visitor logs of who visits the garden site, the number of people using old browsers is under 5% (with most of those using Netscape 4). I decided it was time to make the switch, for several reasons:

1) Accessibility. Like I mentioned earlier, the loss of accessibility for some is being replaced by increased accessibility for others. Who are those others? Well, since the site is now standards-compliant, it can be "read" in a sensible manner by screen readers - technology that delivers the web to blind and low vision web surfers by vocalizing the text on the site. My logic is that users of old browsers can upgrade, if needed - but there is no way a blind or low vision user can "upgrade" screen readers, since the technology does not exist.

2) Cost. The web standards, if rendered properly by the browser makers, are a "design-once, view-everywhere" technology. No more bloated code or redirects to make a page render perfectly in every version of every browser. If I don't have to spend the time assembling pages to conform to every browser, I can spend it elsewhere - like getting more content online.

3) Viewable in other devices. Content on the web is increasingly finding its way to PDAs, cell phones, television sets and so on - using web standards allows the content to render in a legible way in these alternative devices.

If you are interested in the topic of web standards, I suggest you visit the Web Standards Project for more information.

Lastly, if you have a modern browser and have trouble viewing these pages (or the design looks slightly off-kilter), I suggest you apply all service packs to your browser (particularly if you use Internet Explorer on the PC). Frankly, you should be doing this regularly for security reasons (software patches), since older versions of most IE browsers have some serious security flaws. Visit the Windows Update site to upgrade your browser.

Posted by Daniel Mosquin at 1:28 AM on September 5, 2003