do u know what may be the reason that the w3c chose to have it implemented
the mozilla way! whats the advateg
"DeMoN LaG" <n@a> wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "ahmed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> 9lv7r3$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:9lv7r3$[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 21 Aug 2001:
>
> > i don't know guys.. but;; i was thinking of it in the nn4.x way, as
> > in each element's acts as a document.
> >
> > so yes i see now how it works,, i just find it annowing.. i mean
> > what if i don't want to specify any z-index for container elements
> > but i want elements that are in them to be z-indexed among each
> > other,,,
> >
> > i won't argue any more i just prefer the ie way, now don't start
> > screaming at me spec stuff, i mean the w3c's pecs are not the words
> > of god and are changeble,, So if i had it my way i would get it
> > done the ie way..
>
> The W3C's specs are about as Word of God as it can get, dude. And if
> you want to know something funny, here you go. Those specifications
> that IE isn't following that every other browser is, Microsoft helped
> write those standards. Microsoft is a major part of the W3C, and as
> little of the standard as they choose to incorporate into their
> browsers, they help write all of them. How sad is it for them to
> intentionally not follow standards that they have helped to write? How
> pathetic would it be for the United States to help the UN write a new
> polution law, or any kind of law or agreement, and then intentionally
> choose to ignore it?
>
> --
> ICQ: 123728792
> AIM: FlyersR1 9
> email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> _ = m
