On 19 Jul 2001 18:12:06 GMT, Vadim Plessky wrote:
>> I'm pretty sure the CSS standard specifically states that
>> invalid/unknown CSS must be ignored.
> well, than I have to give up and say that this part of CSS standard
> is *wrong*. I understand that both MS and Netscape needed such
> "ignore as undefined" feature. Probably, they pushed it to standards
> body, as they, for sure, were controlling around 95% of browser
> market, especially in 1995-1996...
The explanation given in the standard is that browsers supporting
earlier CSS standards will be usable with newer CSS. Makes sense to
me; to ignore the stuff you don't understand and show the rest
(doesn't HTML specify similar behavior for unknown tags/attributes?)
> By the way, from consumer's point of view, MS's concept
> (auto-correcting) sound more reasonable to me.
I disagree - depending on browsers taking wild guesses at authors
intentions instead of following the standards is a large part of why
most of the body of existing HTML is such a mess today.
> Looking forward to see first *standard-compliant browser* on planet
> Earth. :-) There is none (yet), so in this case out discussion start
> to look too *acedemish*...
Full standards compliance is probably not achievable, all non-trivial
programs tend to have bugs, but Mozilla is actually very good at
standards. MSIE5/Mac isn't bad either, I hear.
This discussion is off-topic here, further discussion in
comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html.
Best regards,
--
"I'd say that crossed the line from Adam Sj�gren
ironic coincidence to evil omen." [EMAIL PROTECTED]
