[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Quoting Oleg Goldshmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > Sadly, I think we have reached the conclusion it's not exactly correct > > > anymore. > > > > Why not? > > For one reason: if, as you suggested to me, you have to keep your web > programmers informed of new standards all the time, it costs you money. After > all, they have to learn every new shtick on the w3c. HTML4 standard has turned > to XHTML? Update the site. Hours of work, mucho dinero.
I don't see why? > > Or you can keep it on the old standard, and risk breaking at some point. Well, it is my impression that standard-defining bodies are quite careful about backwards compatibility: standards break old functionality when there is a really good reason to. Your example sounds like one such case to me: there is a real privacy reason behind this [disclaimer: I am saying this on the basis of what you wrote and a bit of common sense that may be wrong - I am not an expert on this by any measure]. It would seem to me that understanding why it has been decided this should go into the standard is an issue to be discussed between you and the suits. -- Oleg Goldshmidt | [EMAIL PROTECTED] ================================================================= To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
