[WEB4LIB] RE: HTML Referring?

[Dan Lester]

Thursday, October 24, 2002, 10:55:38 AM, you wrote:

RW> Dictating to users what browser they shall use completely goes
RW> against the original open/egalitarian intent of the web.  This
RW> kind of general policy is just plain wrong on principle.  (I
RW> feel I am stating the obvious here BTW).

I don't have any argument with your point.  However, we have to make
business decisions every day, and one that we've had to make is that
we support only one platform (Win98/2K/XP) and only one browser (IE5.5
or 6.x).  We have nothing against other platforms or browsers, it is
just that we can't offer support on them.  We do the same thing on our
office products: we support MSOffice 2K and XP.  The library has no
machines that aren't on supported OS, but we have a couple users who
still insist on using WordPerfect and one who actually still uses
Lotus 1-2-3.  We counsel against this, but we can't make them change;
only their supervisors can do that.  They know that no one on the
entire campus offers any sort of official support for either of those
programs, and that they're on their own.  If they have problems with
those packages, don't tell me about it.

RW> How is someone using GNU/Linux supposed to access this
RW> information?  There is no IE for them to use. (Answer: they will
RW> just have to hope that Navigator 4.x, or Mozilla, or one of the
RW> other browsers works).

That's fine.  They can use those browsers and rarely have any
problems. But there's nothing I can do to make ProQuest products work
with the Lotus browser.  Of course those people have Win machines so
they do have IE.  We have almost no problems with **ix folks because
they're techie enough to solve their own problems.

RW> Just because you have received no complaints does not mean that
RW> no one has ever been inconvenienced by the poor design.  But
RW> that is not the real point anyway.

If you, or others, have problems with http://library.boisestate.edu on
any of our unsupported platforms, do let me know, either on or off
list.  We try to do what we can with very limited resources (13
percent budget cut this year, no raises last July, none next July,
etc.)

RW> The point is the WWW was intended to be about freedom and
RW> choice, not monopoly vendor-lockin.

No argument.  As noted, we try, but can't be all things to all people.
And, of course, the web just t'ain't what it used to be, either.

RW>  Browser-specific web design
RW> such as that you so blithely announce attempts to restrict this
RW> freedom for the sake of the web designer's convenience.

Whoa...that's backwards.  We're not designing FOR just one browser. We
try to be useful on all, but can't guarantee that, as we don't have
all platforms or browsers available.  And for those who want to be
fanatic about that, check out the stats at the site previously noted,
and you'll see that there is a very small number who are still using
IE1.0 and NS1.0.  Is ANYONE checking that their sites are useful on
those browsers?

RW>  Rather
RW> obviously, a better alternative is to design your web pages
RW> according to generally accepted W3C web standards (like HTML
RW> 4.01 Transitional, or XHTML for example).  Then there is no need
RW> to dictate (dictation is for dictators?) to users what browser
RW> they 'should' be using (a highly presumptuous position anyway).

We're NOT dictating what they should use.  We ARE saying there is a
limit to what we can support.

RW> Rather users can make up their own minds -- a much better
RW> situation for those who value freedom and the ability to
RW> *choose*.

They have those options.  After 43 years in higher education I know
that it is impossible to dictate ANYthing to students and faculty, and
I sure wouldn't try.  But, like our colleagues at the Reference Desk,
we can't answer all questions for all people.

dan

-- 
Dan Lester, Data Wrangler  dan at RiverOfData.com 208-283-7711
3577 East Pecan, Boise, Idaho  83716-7115 USA
www.riverofdata.com  www.gailndan.com  Stop Global Whining!