Jonathan Wilson wrote:
> Its very easy to test if a webpage is standards complient (using the w3c > validator). > Whats needed is a way to test if a browser is standards complient or if > an authoring tool is outputing complient code. If such a thing existed > (coupled with some kind of logo to indicate that the browser or > authoring tool passes the tests, similar to how microsoft labeles > hardware and software as being "windows logo complient") and if browser > and authoring tool makers worked to make their products get this logo, > it would make the web a better, more open place. > Only problem is that IE, would probobly likely be designed to > deliberatly FAIL such tests so that webmasters and authoring tool makers > would be forced to continue to output non standards complient HTML so > that it will be rendered properly by IE... > Point well made. *sigh* You only have to visit the newsgroups of authoring tools like FP and DW to see how many out there have no clue about the w3c validator or even attempting to write pages that conform. Instead they swap all the tricks (sic) for how to use non-standard stuff to seemingly make things work (sic). And you are right in your other message. If you do make the effort it does make cross-browser stuff easier - not harder.
