How Did I Get Here? Browser Upgrade Campaign
How did I get here?
The folks who built the site you were trying to visit have directed you to this page because your browser does not support accepted web standards. Or you may have followed a link to this page in order to learn more about upgrading your browser.
Note to spam recipients: If you are visiting this page as a result of an unsolicited email message we apologize. We have never sent any unsolicited bulk mail, and in fact only rarely do we use any email address in the webstandards.org domain. More commonly, our members reply to mail sent to webstandards.org email addresses using their own, private, email accounts. If you receive unsolicited mail claiming to be from this domain, the sender is almost certainly forged. Read more about why The WaSP Hates Spam and Viruses.
Note to site builders: The WaSP Browser Upgrade Campaign has come to a close. As such we ask that you discontinue your use of this upgrade message and visit the Beyond the Browser Upgrade Campaign page to learn about what to do instead.
Note to visitors redirected from other sites: if you are not where you think you should be, please contact the webmaster of the site you just tried to reach, and let them know your opinions on the matter. Please also ask them to cease the use of the Browser Upgrade Campaign redirect, as it will no longer serve the intended purpose.
What “web standards?”
The ones created by the World Wide Web Consortium – the people who invented the Web itself. The W3C created these standards so the Web would work better for everyone. New browsers, mainly, support these standards; old browsers, mainly, don’t.
What can I do?
Your choice of software may be out of your hands. However, if you do have control over what software you are using you should consider upgrading your browser. Doing so will improve your web experience, enabling you to use and view sites as their creators intended.
The following browsers support numerous web standards including CSS, XHTML, and the DOM (a universal means of controlling the behavior of web pages):
- Netscape v7 or higher (all platforms), Mozilla Firefox (Windows or Mac OS X), Galeon (Linux GNOME Desktop) or other browser stemming from the Mozilla.org project.
- Opera v7 or higher (Windows, Linux)
- Apple’s Safari (Mac OS X)
- Konqueror (Linux KDE Desktop)
- Microsoft Internet Explorer v6 or higher (Windows) or v5 or higher (Macintosh)
Please note that this page does not pretend to be an exhaustive list of browsers that support web standards, nor a test of browser compliance, nor a side-by-side comparison of various manufacturers’ browsers.
The Web Standards Project is a grassroots coalition fighting for standards which ensure simple, affordable access to web technologies for all.
Recent Buzz
WCAG 2 and mobileOK Basic Tests specs are proposed recommendations
By Bruce Lawson | November 4th, 2008
WCAG 2 and the mobileOK Basic Tests specifications have been moved to “proposed recommendation status” by the W3C, which means that the technical material is complete and it has been implemented in real sites.
WCAG 2
Shawn Henry writes of WCAG 2,
Over the last few months, the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) Working Group has been going through a process to ensure that WCAG 2.0 can be implemented. Developers and dsigners from around the world gave WCAG 2.0 a “test drive” in their own Web content.
The result: Successful implementations in a wide range of sites including education, commerce, government, and a blog; in languages including Japanese, German, English, and French; and using a wide range of technologies including scripting, multimedia, Flash, and WAI-ARIA. You can get the nitty-gritty details from the Implementation Report.
It’s possible that WCAG 2 could be the new accessibility standard by Christmas. What does that mean for you? The answer: it depends. If your approach to accessibility has been one of guidelines and ticking against checkpoints, you’ll need some reworking your test plans as the priorities, checkpoints and surrounding structures have changed from WCAG 1. But if your site was developed with an eye to real accessibility for real people rather than as a compliance issue, you should find that there is little difference.
mobileOK Basic Tests
I’ve mentioned this largely so you don’t have the same worries with them that I did. Crudely speaking, they’re an automated test that a site will be OK on a very low-spec mobile mobile device called the “Default Delivery Context” (DDC) so there are certain rules in the validator such as a page cannot be larger than 20K. This caused me some degree of tizzy, until I read the caveats at the top of the specicaton:
mobileOK Basic primarily assesses basic usability, efficiency and interoperability. It does not address the important goal of assessing whether users of more advanced devices enjoy a richer user experience than is possible using the DDC.
…The Best Practices, and hence the tests, are not promoted as guidance for achieving the optimal user experience. The capabilities of many devices exceed those defined by the DDC. It will often be possible, and generally desirable, to provide an experience designed to take advantage of the extra capabilities.
So my advice: make your pages as long as the content requires, no longer or shorter. Use the images that the content and design needs, and let the user decide whether he or she wishes to accept your images. Make sure all images that convey information have explanatory alternative text for those who can’t consume your images.
Now that sounds familiar…
Filed in Accessibility, Browsers, General, Mobile, Validation, W3C/Standards Documentation, Web Standards (general) | Comments (0)