> that's three of the first four websites i tried (slashdot did the right > thing.) > to me, it's irrevalent what the standard says if a good percentage of > important > websites don't work.
I'm not disagreeing with that, you have to take what you're given and that means dealing with invalid tag soup. IMHO, you should emit HTML errors to stderr. And choose what to do next, which would usually be copying I.E.'s broken HTML rendering. Netscape used to display a blank (grey) page for invalid HTML, I.E. rendered broken HTML, so people would say that Netscape was broken because of this ! (though it was broken in other ways) XHTML will save us, validity is built in http://plan9.bell-labs.com/wiki/plan9/plan_9_wiki/ This page is not Valid XHTML 1.1! oh, maybe not then http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fplan9.bell-labs.com%2Fwiki%2Fplan9%2Fplan_9_wiki%2F
