[qouting bill from another subject.]
> Validation is a tool I use when writing HTML. If the real world uses NS4.0 > still and we care about those users, and border=0 doesn't break anything > else, I don't really care if a validator says it's not perfect, as long as > I understand why it's saying that. What I do care about the people viewing > it. When a new browser comes out that breaks because of border=0 it's > likely that NS4.0 will be long gone.
firstly, i personally agree.
BUT untill now we have really used a lot of effort on the site to make all pages validate to HTML 4.01. and i for one couldn't live with a non-valid site now that we are so close (i hope).
(i much prefer not to break 4.01 HTML _and_ have the stupid border in netscape4 for instance, than the other way around.)
Hmm... I must say I prefer having a valid site too. It's so annoying when you want to say "We have valid HTML", but can't because there's one error (an people like to have fun checking that kind of thing).
at the same note, we have to do html tags to live up 4.01 specs. otherwise we have to change almost _all_ the tags and possiby end tags if someone takes the time. i thought the suggestion was to validate to HTML 4.01 and then later to XHTML specs?
so untill we decide to change our dtd, we should for instance do like:
<tag atrribute="value">
and NOT
<tag atrribute="value" />
About the XHTML: agreed.
-- Per Einar Ellefsen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
