The search engine thing is pretty much a lie.
People are begging Google to factor w3c validity into the relevance of
their results, but there's no good reason they should - and I personally
believe this is a bit sinister.
Invalid code should succeed or fail on its own merits, not because
standardistas bully 'validity' into practice.
I hold Google in very high esteem for their complete magnanimity over
standards while maintaining (some might say as a result) the highest
elegance and popularity.
If human beings or machines start complaining that this irreverence is
in any practical way detrimental to their experience, then standardistas
should flock to the rescue. Until then, the notion cannot help but smell
mafiosi - protection racket kind of stuff (- You need this 'help' I'm
giving you. I know it seems inconvenient and expensive but you really
do. - This really doesn't look like help to me. - I don't remember
asking you a goddamn thing).
...
I sympathise with the client: if I can't justify how it's useful to
them, then there's no reason they should be bothered with it. If I can't
justify it to myself, there's no reason I should bother myself with it.
This is the ultimate opportunity to question yourself and work out
whether you adhere to standards because of their actual virtue or simply
because you like rules, big crowds, and being better than other people.
Regards,
Barney
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
