On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 1:42 PM, Vincent Pollard<vinc...@version51.com> wrote: > > 1) The third line here validates in CSS3 but not in CSS2.1 - > > a) does that matter? >
Not really, since you're doing it intentionally, and you'd run into that issue with anything that's valid in CSS3 but not in CSS2.1. > > I didn't really want to create a separate stylesheet for IE6 but maybe I > should if I want validation. What would you do? > I usually end up making IE-version specific files & wrap them in conditional comments. That way you don't need to rely on a hack to get see you through. (Though I have to admit that I'll throw hacks in my main CSS files during development, if I can, to keep things grouped together for easier revision.) > P.S. what really are the advantages of being compliant? I hear it's > better for SEO and I like the idea, just from a professional pride POV > but why be compliant. Do a couple of underscore hacks pose a problem? Well-formed HTML can play a significant role in how your pages are parsed & indexed by search engines (as well as some assistive technologies), but CSS validation doesn't play a role in that way. Validating your CSS helps to preempt real mistakes, etc. The validator has saved me from a forgotten semicolon several more times than I'd like to admit. Erik ______________________________________________________________________ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
