<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Scoble Questions WASP, Opera</title>
	<atom:link href="http://bokardo.com/archives/scoble-questions-wasp-opera/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://bokardo.com/archives/scoble-questions-wasp-opera/</link>
	<description>Interface Design &#38; UX by Joshua Porter</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 28 Sep 2011 20:28:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe Clark</title>
		<link>http://bokardo.com/archives/scoble-questions-wasp-opera/#comment-320</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe Clark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Mar 2005 20:14:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bokardo.com/archives/scoble-questions-wasp-opera/#comment-320</guid>
		<description>Do keep in mind that I was on Six Apart&#039;s case (*not* Anil Dash&#039;s, actually) because they have a stated commitment to standards compliance and accessibility, a large staff, and adequate resources of all kinds to implement WCAG and ATAG *yet have not*.

Anyway, Microsoft does not stand to gain from full standards support. It must now catch up even to the level of competing free browsers. I suppose if MS did a better implementation of standards than anybody else, it could be a selling point.

I trust that, at this stage of the game, I don&#039;t have to explain why Web standards are important, particularly to many users with disabilities.

I like your side-by-side comment layout, BTW.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Do keep in mind that I was on Six Apart&#8217;s case (*not* Anil Dash&#8217;s, actually) because they have a stated commitment to standards compliance and accessibility, a large staff, and adequate resources of all kinds to implement WCAG and ATAG *yet have not*.</p>
<p>Anyway, Microsoft does not stand to gain from full standards support. It must now catch up even to the level of competing free browsers. I suppose if MS did a better implementation of standards than anybody else, it could be a selling point.</p>
<p>I trust that, at this stage of the game, I don&#8217;t have to explain why Web standards are important, particularly to many users with disabilities.</p>
<p>I like your side-by-side comment layout, BTW.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bud Gibson</title>
		<link>http://bokardo.com/archives/scoble-questions-wasp-opera/#comment-317</link>
		<dc:creator>Bud Gibson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Mar 2005 16:58:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bokardo.com/archives/scoble-questions-wasp-opera/#comment-317</guid>
		<description>Josh, re: Firefox, I&#039;ve known many users who made the switch.  The two features that came up in my unscientific survey were:

1.  No more pop-ups.  So, kind of security, but really removal of annoyance.

2.  Tabbed browsing.  No more explosion of windows every time you want to view multiple web pages.

The limiting factor was the extent to which firefox could render web pages.  So, one might argue that compliance was the limiting factor.

My guess would be that IE&#039;s move to standards compliance would be a boon to users because it would allow easier switching.  Microsoft will find compliance a necessity if firefox spreads enough forcing more standards compliance.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Josh, re: Firefox, I&#8217;ve known many users who made the switch.  The two features that came up in my unscientific survey were:</p>
<p>1.  No more pop-ups.  So, kind of security, but really removal of annoyance.</p>
<p>2.  Tabbed browsing.  No more explosion of windows every time you want to view multiple web pages.</p>
<p>The limiting factor was the extent to which firefox could render web pages.  So, one might argue that compliance was the limiting factor.</p>
<p>My guess would be that IE&#8217;s move to standards compliance would be a boon to users because it would allow easier switching.  Microsoft will find compliance a necessity if firefox spreads enough forcing more standards compliance.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

