Okay, I've designed a crappy site, because it is better than what my office had before. You can check it out at http://www.unm.edu/~hravp/ It is far from standards compliant, and would never be my first choice of colours. (It's new mexico, go figure). So I've recently learned how to write standards compliant pages, that look good in all new standards complaint browsers. I proposed creating new table-free pages, and was shot down. Why, you ask? Because the page won't look good to the people using netscape 4. FOUR! Why do we care? If we do it with CSS then it won't matter, they can still see the information, just not all shiny. If they want a nice, pretty, shiny web page, then UPGRADE! So here was our final decision: Screw blind people trying to go to the benefits/compensation pages at UNM Screw people upgrading to Netscape 6 and 7 (both standards compliant) And cater to the people running out-dated browsers. Can someone point out the logic here? (and no, we don't have CGI/PHP capabilities, so we can't do both) The standards compliant pages are easier to code! and take up half the space on the server!!! arg! See, look here: http://www.unm.edu/~cjadams/nmrid/ That was developed from scratch in about 4 hours. a lot better than coding in tables!! </rant> EDIT::
Ah, but if they have javascript disabled (and yes, some of our users do...) then we are back where we started We have also been told not to use java script. They want, but they don't want.... bah.
have you got stats for people using netscape 4 on the current site?? If there a large percentage using it then using a css layout may not be the *best* idea. I looked after a site which had 20% NS4 users, and that was only a few months ago Now, there may be laws against this where you are Could be worth checking out to support your case They are, but only if you know how Old fashioned web dev's can be a bit resistant to change cheers alastair
