Groups > comp.os.linux.networking > #836

Re: Strange blog-comment URL 'mechanism'?

From	Bill Marcum <bill@lat.localnet>
Newsgroups	comp.os.linux.networking, comp.os.linux.misc
Subject	Re: Strange blog-comment URL 'mechanism'?
Followup-To	comp.os.linux.networking
Date	2011-11-28 17:50 -0500
Organization	Hooves Across the Water, Manes Across The Sky
Message-ID	<dqfdq8-mrf.ln1@lat.localnet> (permalink)
References	<javfb6$h2p$1@dont-email.me> <jb0964$91k$1@dont-email.me> <3JKdnR_Vd-_AJk7TnZ2dnUVZ8uednZ2d@supernews.com>

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Followups directed to: comp.os.linux.networking

Show all headers | View raw

["Followup-To:" header set to comp.os.linux.networking.]
On 2011-11-28, Deux <deux@none.none> wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 15:25:58 +0000, no.top.post wrote:
>> Ok, so then with JavaScript you've got the freedom to do anything, and
>> you're not restricted to a RFC.
>> And the game is determined by the current fad. So if the market
>> dominator introduces a new facility, others must follow, or fall out?
>
> Yes, that's pretty much how it works in the world of web design. Only 
> geeks are interested in standards, businesses are interested in making 
> their websites usable on the most popular browsers in order to maximise 
> revenue.
>
> Making a webpage standards compliant to work with text based clients 
> would cost more than it would make back in revenue.
>
> This isn't just a problem for text based browsers. Because web pages are 
> often made to work with either MSIE or Firefox, users of other browsers 
> will often find that pages don't render.
>
Many websites have a "mobile" version that can work with text-based, non-
javascript browsers. But as more people start using smart phones, there
will probably be less support for "dumb phones".


-- 
FUN is never having to say you're SUSHI!!

Thread

Strange blog-comment URL 'mechanism'? no.top.post@gmail.com - 2011-11-28 07:11 +0000
  Re: Strange blog-comment URL 'mechanism'? Krzysztof Mitko <fakemail@krzysztof.at.eml.dot.cc> - 2011-11-28 08:04 +0000
    Re: Strange blog-comment URL 'mechanism'? no.top.post@gmail.com - 2011-11-28 15:25 +0000
      Re: Strange blog-comment URL 'mechanism'? Deux <deux@none.none> - 2011-11-28 10:48 -0600
        Re: Strange blog-comment URL 'mechanism'? Jean-David Beyer <jeandavid8@verizon.net> - 2011-11-28 14:40 -0500
          Re: Strange blog-comment URL 'mechanism'? Deux <deux@none.none> - 2011-11-28 16:13 -0600
            Re: Strange blog-comment URL 'mechanism'? Deux <deux@none.none> - 2011-11-28 16:27 -0600
              Re: Strange blog-comment URL 'mechanism'? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2011-11-29 00:36 +0000
            Re: Strange blog-comment URL 'mechanism'? Jean-David Beyer <jeandavid8@verizon.net> - 2011-11-30 09:24 -0500
              Re: Strange blog-comment URL 'mechanism'? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2011-11-30 14:37 +0000
          Re: Strange blog-comment URL 'mechanism'? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2011-11-29 00:34 +0000
        Re: Strange blog-comment URL 'mechanism'? Bill Marcum <bill@lat.localnet> - 2011-11-28 17:50 -0500
        Re: Strange blog-comment URL 'mechanism'? Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> - 2011-11-29 08:23 +0200
          Re (2): Strange blog-comment URL 'mechanism'? no.top.post@gmail.com - 2011-12-01 13:25 +0000
      Re: Strange blog-comment URL 'mechanism'? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2011-11-29 00:32 +0000

csiph-web