[Previous] [Next] - [Index] [Thread Index] - [Previous in Thread] [Next in Thread]

Subject: Re: UKNM: Web Usage Stats
From: Robb Masters
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1998 10:31:57 +0100

From: Daniel Bambach <danmanatomniscience [dot] co [dot] uk>
> If your objective is to build your site to work right down to the lowly
> text-only browser, then you shouldnt be giving a monkeys what browser
> people look at your site with. If on the other hand you want to employ
> newer technologies then you have to start eliminating some browsers, and
> which do you loose? Well, the least popular I presume.

No, no, no - you don't lose anyone, that my point. Losing (read:
rejecting, alienating, etc.) part of your target audience is a bad
idea. But that doesn't mean compromising your site, or ignoring
the potential of new technologies.

<blatant SelfPublicity="on">

Take The National Lottery web site. It uses Flash, Shockwave and
Java to enhance the user experience. But none of them are mandatory
- there are always alternatives, either user-selectable or automatic.
This goes right down to the level of graphics - if a user has a non-
graphical browser then images are replaced by appropriate text. In
this way all information is accessible to all potential users. Sure
there are one or two features that, say, text-only users can't access
(i.e. Shockwave games) but they're not an essential part of the
experience. This isn't even a huge amount of work. Once you've built
a site for the top four browsers adding in alternative text and
graphics for lower end users isn't a big deal (though it's better
to take them into account from the start).



Robb Masters rmastersatredkite [dot] com
Project Manager
Red Kite New Media http://www.redkite.com/

  Re: UKNM: Web Usage Stats, Daniel Bambach
  Re: UKNM: Web Usage Stats, Jon Beverley

[Previous] [Next] - [Index] [Thread Index] - [Next in Thread] [Previous in Thread]