On Mon, 28 Nov 2005, J.C. Roberts wrote: > On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 10:29:43 -0500, Jeremy David > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >There are 5 errors on the main page alone. That means that no matter how > >useful the content on the website is, the code breaks down for a lot of > >people. Standards are important. Where HTML is concerned, they're doubly so, > >because there are so many different clients (browsers) being used by so many > >different kinds of people. > > Jeremy, > > I encourage you to do a bit more research before posting something like > the above. Did you really think the compliance errors were never noticed > before you pointed them out? > > Yes, you are right that the site is not perfectly W3C standards > compliant. The point you missed is the overwhelming majority of clients > (browsers) are *ALSO* not compliant with the standards. The supposed > "errors" you pointed out are nothing more than work-arounds for > non-compliant browsers. Contrary to your claims, those supposed "errors" > do not "break" anything, instead they actually _FIX_ problems in buggy > browsers.
It's even a FAQ: http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq8.html#wwwnotstd -Otto
