I was just monitoring early results from the Australian federal election
at http://vtr.aec.gov.au/ and noticed this note at the bottom of screen:
This site is compliant with the web standards HTML 4.01, CSS2 and WCAG
1.0 for increased accessibility.
--
Neerav Bhatt
http://www.bhatt.id.au
Web
Geoff;
But still, strictly speaking, an
XML based document is bound to be more semantically correct because it
is
well formed.
Why? Are the semantics of the following deferent?
ul
liIce cream/li
liSprinkles/li
/ul
...
ul
liIce cream
liSprinkles
/ul
SGML and XML
must admit its good to see the move! The Standard compliance I mean.
Code semantics is not the best
H1 class=mainheadingspan id=labelElectionTitle2004 Federal
Election /span
Facts amp; Figures/H1
still I would say its a positive move.
On
Dean;
Then there is the whole Web Applications trend. Again, HTML and
XHTML are pretty much the same in functionality here, but if I'm
using an application on the Web then I want to make sure it is
well-formed and well-structured. I don't want a typo by a web
developer (such as leaving off an end
It is a good start, especially using unordered lists for the menus at the side
But some of the things like summary=layout aren't too clever... and
it isn't valid HTML 4.01 transiltional, fails on one point...
TD width=99% background=Images/logospacer.gifnbsp;/TD
Still got spacer gif...
Agreed
