On Mon, Nov 28, 2005 at 08:15:00AM -0800, 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. > > Kind Regards, > JCR And that's exactly the problem.
Creating good html code means to me to look at the stardards released by w3.org and then start coding. The result validates but it won't look the same anywhere. So, you have to fight <div>-wars and do things that aren't required by w3.org just to make things run. At that point one can see that the web is just broken. Good HTML is _not_ decided by browser, _not_ decided by your screen resolution, _not_ even decided by whether you use a computer or a toaster, it's just platform independend html. So please keep things as they are, there is no better solution. Jonathan -- | /"\ ASCII Ribbon | Jonathan Glaschke - Lorenz-Goertz-Stra_e 71, | \ / Campaign Against | 41238 Moenchengladbach, Germany; | X HTML In Mail | jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | / \ And News | http://jonathan-glaschke.de/
