Slashdot Mirror
US Copyright Office Considering MSIE-only website
wikinerd writes "The United States Copyright Office asks whether you would have any problem if you were required to use Microsoft Internet Explorer in order to pre-register a work via their website. The Norwegian government recently said no to proprietary formats, but it seems that the US government sites should be informed about the existence of non-Microsoft Web browsers, such as Firefox, Konqueror, Opera, and Safari. I have written a letter about this issue, which is posted on my blog for everyone to copy and base on it their own response. If they see how many people use alternative browsers, they'll probably reconsider and stay within the W3C standards."
Don't let them make the mistake.
Write an intelligent and well-informed comment to:
Copyright GC/ I&R
P.O. Box 70400
Southwest Station, Washington, DC 20024-0400
My blog
It'd be easier to respond to their question if they posted an estimated date for when other browsers will be supported.
ID Number: G00125170, "Design Web Applications for Standards, Not for Browsers", (2 March 2005)
Unbelievably, it's not. Have ever talked to these developers? They do it on purpose, because they think it looks good. Not because it causes problems. They like the scrollbar colours to match the colour scheme they have for the website. The fact that it's hard to spot the scrollbars is irrelevant - same as using microscopic font sizes - they just tell you to "get glasses, grandpa".
Anyway, Konqueror applies those scrollbar styles as well, so it doesn't just affect Internet Explorer.
Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
When you write, remember to include five copies plus an original.
(For some reason, they require that "if sent by mail, an original and five copies of any comment should be addressed to...")
As covered on Groklaw, this is due to the fact that the Copyright Office is using an old version of Seibel CRM.
Opinion:
Of course, why they'd use some substandard MS-only piece of garbage is beyond me, but it's not because they were actively looking to cut out non-MS people...just someone suggested a crappy product and standardized on it.
Nothing new.
Uhm... Doesn't Section 508 HTML/design standard make it ILLEGAL for a government web site to not follow the standard?
Section 508 has all sorts of stuff that goes beyond W3C to include formatting, layout, table naming, etc. to ensure that a web site is easily browsable by non-sighted users' browser tools. (i.e. Lynx-like)
They can't do what they are saying they want to do without breaking the law.
(It's not that hard to make a compliant web site, you just need to work it in the process from the beginning.)
- Most web designers aren't programmers or even that techincal. They can see that there is a problem if they test with other browsers, but have no idea how to fix it.
- This is because fiding out how different elements behave in different browsers is incredibly difficult.
- As an example, I found after many hours of frustration that when using nested tables, IE will only size properly when each row element is sized where as netscape will enforce the widest size
- I looked and looked for examples or explanations and found nothing but I was determined to make sure the site worked cross browser.
- So I get it all done, test it in Opera, and guess what, the fucking fonts are not taking styles. Great.
- This leads me to stating that people who write browsers interpret the standards in different ways, making life difficult for web site designers.
- I have stopped sending webmasters emails pointing out that I won't visit thier IE only site and I point out the problems and I eithger get ignored or flamed. I haven't sent in a complaint in years and won't.
- I can tell you from a corporate point of view that as long as people don't complain about non-compliance, the PHBs assume that as long as there are no complaints, then all is well.
- Many of the books and other resources on HTML and web design blather on about non-essential issues and many of the browser compatablity charts are woefully out of date. Yet adding yet another chart or tutorial is pointless because you won't find it in the morass of bad information.
So I can't completely beleive that all web designers are inept. And to be frank, it's eaiser and more cost effective to design for one browser than all of them. Now don't tell me about how great standards are, I am a believer, but I also know that having a deep knowledege of IE and ActiveX will allow designers to do more, easily.And make sure you do RTFA because it says that Support for Netscape 7.2, Firefox 1.0.3, and Mozilla 1.7.7 is planned but will not be available when preregistration goes into effect. Present users of these browsers may experience problems when filing claims. Meaning this is a temporary problem, albiet a needless one.
If it's Siebel powered, the site will probably be Windows-only even when it supports more browsers. Last time I encountered Siebel, it used an ActiveX control in the browser. That is really a bigger story than what browsers they support this week.
Netscape can use the IE renderer... This is why they say they can support it. New Netscape is just IE in sheeps clothing. Therefor, as a result, the content in question would still be IE only.
From the article:
At this point in the process of developing the Copyright Office's system for online preregistration, it is not entirely clear whether the system will be compatible with web browsers other than Microsoft Internet Explorer versions 5.1 and higher. Filers of preregistration applications will be able to employ these Internet Explorer browsers successfully. Support for Netscape 7.2, Firefox 1.0.3, and Mozilla 1.7.7 is planned but will not be available when preregistration goes into effect. Present users of these browsers may experience problems when filing claims.
Translation:
Yeah, we know that we're supposed to provide uniform access and all that, but those stupid hack developers went and built an IE only site. Now we're staring down a government mandated deadline and there's no way we can fix it fast enough. We're kind of fucked at this point, so we'd better bite the bullet and come clean. Lets see if we can marginalize the issue as we do it, then we kill two birds with one stone and maybe even keep our jobs.
So, um, yeah... this has nothing to do with Netscapes IE renderer. Nice try though.
-1 Uncomfortable Truth