Hi,
If you didn't take the Arun Ganesh's proposition seriously, you can
ignore this mail.
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 1:21 PM, Arun Ganesh <arun.planemad(a)gmail.com> wrote:
As someone who writes css, I am particularly
frightened by IE7. And I can
imagine there are a lot of frontend developers and staff out there who
spend significant time on fixing things for this niche audience, when they
could be working on more constructive things. I came across this service
today which has started to levy a a surcharge on IE7 users [1] and it got
me thinking.
(...)
As one of the most visited places on the internet, it is probably in the
best interests of the planet that we decide its no longer worthwhile to
support this fallen angel. Maybe it time to start showing a notice to IE7
users that their days are numbered and wikipedia may no longer work as
expected unless they move forward in their lives. It has to happen some
day, so why not now and save the internet a lot of pain and suffering?
Our mission isn't to "save the internet a lot of pain and suffering".
The WMF mission is "to empower and engage people around the world to
collect and develop educational content under a free license or in the
public domain, and to disseminate it effectively and globally.".
I don't know if there are mission statement for the Wikimedia tech or
the MediaWiki developers communities, but I don't think to improve
some developers comfort pushing so strongly issues like not supporting
a product help DIRECTLY our objectives WITHOUT BREAKING OTHER
OBJECTIVES (like for the WMF, "to disseminate [the educational
content] effectively and GLOBALLY").
I fear this GLOBALLY includes the 1.5-5% IE7 marketshare.
--
Best Regards,
Sébastien Santoro aka Dereckson
http://www.dereckson.be/