And it came to pass that T Carr wrote:
> You cannot always rely on that Validator. I have to disagree
> with the use of it to decipher problems relating to page
> display.
If you can't rely on the W3 to validate the code standards it
sets, then we're all in trouble.
>
> Thse validators often times enforce strict rules that have
> no affect on hoe a page will display.
Fix the code, and you'll prove that. Right now, you're blowing
a lot of wind. The page doesn't display right, the page has
lots of coding errors, therefore the bad code is affecting the
display.
>
> Look at www.fitnessforlife.com for example. Notice all the
> errors pertaing to table height and image names and so
> forth? None of those issues affect the display of the page.
>
A lot of different errors.
But "getting lucky" is no excuse for sloppy work. Clean up the
code, and it will be easier to track down the problem.
--
}:-) Christopher Jahn
{:-( Dionysian Reveler
Never attempt to distract a masturbating gorilla.
To reply: xjahnATyahooDOTcom
