Dear little Mith'
Can anyone truly be this obtuse?
Arachne is *not* a v1 browser.
Anyone who has used it often enough to put up a huge list of bugs should
*KNOW* Arachne is not "a v1 browser."
Although a few of the pages I access still adhere to HTML 1.x standards,
the majority of them are HTML 3.x and up.
The pages I have problems with are those which break the rules ... not
commenting out javascripts (which is often fixable on the fly) and those
which break the rules, mixing stuff in at random from various versions
of HyperTextMarkupLanguage which often results in contradictory commands
... you can have A or you can have B but you can't have A&B sort of
stuff.
On Sat, 10 Nov 2001 17:20:26 +0000, Mithgol the Webmaster wrote:
> OK but Arachne is AFAIK v1 browser ;-) should I write my pages in HTML 1.0?
> And, also AFAIK, Michael Polak never said anything about DTD
> the site has to follow if it is going to be browsed in Arachne.
> As long as my tags are rendered correctly, I don't care much about what DTD
> they validate in, if any.
Wake up little goth, wake up! Your tags are NOT rendeered correctly
if your pages can't be validated.
> Hmm... I have always thought that I may use any tagged content that is
> interpreted _de_facto_ correctly in the variety of browsers.
> I mean, okay, we have W3C standard, but it's not like the standard for what
> kilogram means, since there are no "standard browsers" around.
Are you certain about that? The "thought" part, I mean. It is
obvious you have not paid attention if you have used multiple browsers,
because many MANY pages render differently from browser to browser, or
even browser version to browser version.
In one sweep of the fingertips you type "_de_facto_" and in the next
sweep you type "there are no 'standard browsers' around." Nothing is
_de_facto_ except the fact that everything changes.
> Difference in rendering was what my unofficial buglist was to demonstrate. In
> Netscape and MSIE, even v4, you may actually use MIDDLE attribute anywhere as a
> synonym to CENTER, except CENTER tag, where CENTER is a tagname and not an
> attribute.
Excuse me, but do you realize how stupid your backpedalling looks?
The bug page does not list things as "differences in rendering web sites
when compared to MSIE and Netscape" ... it lists things a BUGS, things
that are wrong.
If you were honest, and had the cojones to admit you don't know
everything, your page would say that "Although MSIE and Netscape often
break the rules, Arachne will render the page according to W3 standards,
doing the best it can when those standards are incorrectly mis-matched
and improperly used."
> Using old HTML 3.2 tags inside HTML4-tagged content is what I think to be a
> good tradition of "graceful degradation" defined in AnyBrowser.Org.
Think again. Using *any* HTML tag that conflicts with any *other*
HTML tag in the same page is not graceful, although it is certainly
degradation of the page. And since you don't know what many browsers
do, do you really think you're in a position to translate anything as
defined by AnyBrowser.Org?
> An unimplemented feature of MIDDLE==CENTER can be easily implemented by one
> line of C/C++ code, and I still hope it will be. It is as easy as it was with
> clearing all trailing spaces in URL, which was declared "a nasty trick" in
> Michael Polak's history.txt, but was nevertheless implemented.
Excuse me ... if you consider that type of code to be so easily
integrated into existing code [which you have never seen, and are little
likely to understand], why don't you go get busy writing your *own*
browser version? Then we wouldn't have to sit on our hands when all we
really want to say is "Go play in your sandbox and quit trying to play
with the 'big boys'."
> With that W3C validator, ARACHNE MSG was the first tag inside my buglist that
> was repeated to be unexisted.
Hey! Did you ever bother to read any of the readme files, or did you
ever stop to think ... ooops, nevermind. What exists within a program
as an integral part of a browser cannot be "validated" like a webpage.
If you had put the reference to ARACHNE.MSG into the correct format
within your page, the W3 validator would have known it to be part of a
text message and not a piece of shit code!
> I think also that is among potentially divergentional tendencies for the Web,
> when one browser refuses to render what other browser do. BLINK and MARQUEE
> tags, for example. They are not in DTD, still they are useful.
> Arachne need more tags.
Hello in there! Anybody home?? We're among those who want to keep
the web available to the many, rather than the few with specific
dedicated software. W3 exists to struggle against proprietary interests
that want to make certain pages readable only by certain browsers --
like MSN's website being set up for awhile to refuse access to any
non-MS browsers [big mistake!]. Arachne doesn't need more tags thrown
in at random to suit you. What is needed is more people admitting that
you can't please everybody everytime and still have more than 1 person
alive on earth.
Why don't you go play in your sandbox ...
-- Arachne V1.70;rev.3, NON-COMMERCIAL copy, http://arachne.cz/
