Re: Encourage new browser or use ASCII?

Ben Poplawski wrote:
> >> On my site, http://benpop.cgweb.us/, the language menu
> >> http://benpop.cgweb.us/lang/, I make extensive use of Unicode.
> >> Someone requested an ASCII-friendly page, and I suggested
> he get a new browser.
> >>
> >> Is this asking too much, having persons get an
> up-to-date-browser? I
Up-to-date, yes. Your favorite brand, no.  And on the up-to-date front, you
need to be somewhat tolerant (one version or two back is a good rule[1]).
There are too many different reasons (many of which may be out of the end
user's control) for why their browser is different from your favorite, older
than the "cutting edge latest", or otherwise crippled.

[1] Very much a judgement call though, with browsers, they can change
radically version to version, complicating your support.

> I don't know either. I can't read it with IE6. I have utf-8
> encoding and everything, and the pages validate. It's a mystery.
>
> Which browser do you use? I know for sure Firefox gets things
> right, and its quite easy to install, actually.
I'd revise your font-family selections, being sure to include fonts that
definitely include the unicode characters you're using. It is likely the
fail point is not that IE6 doesn't correctly support unicode, but that the
font choices (or substituted font choices) don't have those characters, and
IE isn't finding an alternative.

Arial Unicode MS comes to mind. The trick I'm use for this, I wrap the IPA
bits in a different style, forcing the font to Ariel Unicode MS for them.
Currently, I'm only using it for pronunciation entries, which creates a
handy side-effect that the pronunciation is distinctly different.

Muke Tever wrote:
> Not everyone has their own computer they can install modern
> programs on.
> Some people are stuck with library access or whatnot.   (Ask
> me about the
> joys of trying to log in with a non-ASCII username while on vacation
> sometime.)
Exactly.  Public access, work computer in restrictive environments...

> [And Firefox's stubborn continued lack of implementation for
> the CSS2 property 'inline-block', breaking my beautiful
> furigana templates, has really soured it for me.] :p
Illustrating why I gave up on the 'there can be only one' browser thing ages
ago.

You can write completely standard-compliant HTML and CSS, and each browser
will screw up a different part of it. I used to have a fun time reconciling
what I wanted with the bugs in netscape and the bugs in IE (and keeping my
HTML and CSS standards compliant).  It felt like I was in my kitchen with
three other cooks, each with their own advice...which sometimes, I should
have listened to. I discovered a couple of times that what I thought was a
bug, was in fact, malformed HTML, or poorly written CSS. Oops. One should
listen to the cook that warns that you've picked up salt instead of sugar...

Instead of writing a page, and making sure it works in your favorite
browser, some minimum of effort in making sure it works in most browsers
should be made. Sometimes this means not being has fancy/dandy'd up...but
what matters more? Glitz? Or readable content?

Sites that have done detailed testing of what each browser supports helps.
For example:

http://www.westciv.com/style_master/academy/browser_support/index.html

With some searching, other similar guides can be found.

Iain