I was talking about IE6 vs IE7/8.
Codes uncompatible with IE7 or above have little use and and are largely unused, sometimes unkown.
Have you ever made a website using CSS? Pseudo-selectors like first-child and last-child are very useful, as is the > selector. None of those are supported by IE6. They were also often unused, because IE6 still had a big market share, and you also had to support IE6.
The only reason they want want more "interactive" stuffs is advertising. Save for advertisements, the creation of a website is very simple.
Utter nonsense. I've made interactive stuff, and none of it has been advertising. The same goes for many things. Websites aren't that
simple anymore. Just google for complaints about CSS by people who don't understand it.
It doesn't take 50% more coding time to support IE6. Just simplify the way you desing webpages.
Bogging down the design is not a good proposition, and proof that IE6 isn't that good. Nevertheless, Phantasy Star Cave's main page
is pretty simple 2 column design, yet I had to use a CSS hack to get it to render properly in IE6.
Another site of mine, SeaMonkey.be
, doesn't render properly on IE6 because it doesn't support the CSS min-height property. And that's a very basic design.
Posting a comment on a blog is an activity that exists for more than 10 years. Why does it has to be all of a sudden not possible on IE6?
This is about much more than weblog posting, which is handled server-side.
I urge you to learn about web design instead of making wildly inaccurate statements.
Maybe it's better not to program a website with so many good-looking features. Keep it simple. Adding fancy features to a website means a lot of self-inflicted pain.
I prefer sites which display fine in Internet Explorer 5.5.
Good luck, because that had a wrong box model that could lead to serious rendering quirks.
But somehow state-of-the-art bells and whistles are the pride of an up-to-date website programmer.
Look, most CSS is not about bells and whistles. It's basic style information.