Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 09:13:18 -0500
From: "Michael Walsh" <MJW at mail.press.jhu.edu>
To: <WSFAlist at keithlynch.net>
Subject: [WSFA] Re: Still more on the Capclave '04 web page
Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at keithlynch.net>

>ecfield at comcast.net 03/10/04 08:42AM
>>On Tue, 9 Mar 2004 20:32:59 -0800 (PST) Rich Lynch
><rw_lynch at yahoo.com>
>>writes:
>>
>>>--- "Keith F. Lynch" <kfl at KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Ok, the consensus seems to be for the first .PNG,
>>>>
>>>Whose consensus?  That's the one that has the bright yellow
>>>background when viewed in Netscape 4.7.  It looks bad in
>>>Netscape, in other words.
>>>
>>>Once again, strongly recommend that you use a GIF image
>>>with a transparent background instead of whatever format
>>>that image is.
>>>
>The .PNG file has a transparent background. It is the latest format
>recognized by all current browsers.  It is an update from both GIF and
>JPG for this reason.
>
>Since the current version of Netscape is 7.x, I would think 4.7 is =
VERY
>old and is used in very few systems nowadays.

Heheheheheheh . . . .

We here at the Johns Hopkins University Press (the oldest University Press =
in America, 125 years old last year) . . .  we're using Netscape 4.7.

Why?

Because we're still using Windows 95.

Why?

Hardware.

>It would seem to make a
>lot better sense to upgrade to one of the half-dozen current FREE
>browsers instead of forcing everybody to fall back to support an =
antique
>browser.

Granted I know nada about browers and page design but I have come across  =
this: <http://www.anybrowser.org/campaign/>

I'll the web design geeks fight this one . . . I'll be over there - =
ringside with a tub of buttered popcorn.

>
>Just my not-so-humble opinion of course.
>
>Stan
>

mjw
Who once knew how to use an abacus