<?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: Defining &#8220;Support&#8221; for Legacy Browsers</title>
	<atom:link href="http://briancrescimanno.com/2009/05/04/defining-support-for-legacy-browsers/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://briancrescimanno.com/2009/05/04/defining-support-for-legacy-browsers/</link>
	<description>Thoughts on Web Design, Development, and Applications</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 19 Jul 2010 00:14:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Les Booth</title>
		<link>http://briancrescimanno.com/2009/05/04/defining-support-for-legacy-browsers/comment-page-1/#comment-531</link>
		<dc:creator>Les Booth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Aug 2009 07:06:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://briancrescimanno.com/?p=42#comment-531</guid>
		<description>I agree with the basic principles of Progressive Ehancement, but the results for the average designer and implementer: support for legacy browsers is costly in terms of the actual work to produce multiple &#039;faces&#039; of a site and juggling all the versions. 

It is a natural progression in development of any kind, that first wave washes on past to become history.  Designers should focus on making sure legacy data is readable, but not focus on crippling the tools used in the actual viewing process for those reticent to change.

Well stated piece.  But the bottom line is this: there comes a time for all things to .. move on.  It is that time for those who wish to view online data: Update and move on.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with the basic principles of Progressive Ehancement, but the results for the average designer and implementer: support for legacy browsers is costly in terms of the actual work to produce multiple &#8216;faces&#8217; of a site and juggling all the versions. </p>
<p>It is a natural progression in development of any kind, that first wave washes on past to become history.  Designers should focus on making sure legacy data is readable, but not focus on crippling the tools used in the actual viewing process for those reticent to change.</p>
<p>Well stated piece.  But the bottom line is this: there comes a time for all things to .. move on.  It is that time for those who wish to view online data: Update and move on.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
