Bundy wrote: > Brian Heinrich typed: > >> Bundy wrote: >> >>> Karl typed: >>> >>>> Mozilla 0.9.9 doesn't display www.drudgereport.com correctly. One of >>>> the most popular Web sites. >>>> >>>> Karl >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Bug that deals with the horizontal line <hr> within a table tag with >>> height attrabutes. The tag is W3C (like they matter) complaint >>> although the site isn't, like most site. >>> >>> -- >>> Kyle >>> >> >> Um, Kyle, lemme ask you this: Can you imagine trying to design a web >> site if all there were were proprietary tags? The W3C matters. A lot. > > > Not to a lot of webmasters. What matters is if the page looks good on MS > Explorer while using Front Page to compose it. Heck, mozilla.org isn't > totally compliant. Why waste time (which is money) trying to get your > website to work for a small minority of web surfers? Drudge could very > easily fix the site by getting rid of the height tag on those two tables > that don't load right and make no sense to the outlook of his page. But > then again, since they are compliant, why should he? > > >> So do standards. Think of all the [insert favourite denigrating >> term here] who're still using NN 4.x and wondering why pages don't >> display correctly, &c. And, slowly, there seem to be more and more >> sites that use valid mark-up, which seems to me to be a good thing. >> >> — Brian >> > >
Unfortunately, you're right. Too many Web authors fixate on how things appear in IE. Don't use FrontPage, so I can't comment, though a friend of mine excused some bad mark-up on his site by referring to some 'old HTML' that 'wasn't necessary in FrontPage' (?!), like FrontPage was a mark-up language that had somehow superceded [X]HTML. The same guy has also said that IE's dominance of the browser market makes /it/ the /de facto/ standard, and that W3C standards therefore don't matter. That's a problem that needs to be addressed and publicised. Using valid [X]HTML and CSS on your pages and publicising the fact is one place to begin. Something like the WaSP's browser up-grade initiative is also helpful; so, perhaps is the 'Any Browser' initiative (though I haven't had a chance to do more than bookmark the page). Something more concrete than that is needed, however. I could care less if a surfer uses IE or NS 6+ or Moz or Opera 6 (NN 4.x is another matter, however); I /do/ care, however, that IE mis-renders my CSS. Just /how/ to get that information out is another matter. Netscape and Mozilla are at least honest enough to tell you what known problems/issues there are with their browsers; M$ doesn't even bother to tell you that IE launches to quickly 'cos it hi-jacks a chunk of your RAM. Any thoughts on how to make information like this more readily accessible to people? — Brian -- ‘We have seen the enemy and he is us’ — Walt Kelly’s Pogo
