By the same token, HTML that is regularly used and that is handled well by IE, Opera, and Mozilla (which this is), well, those ARE the standard.
Relying on W3 to tell you who you should listen to, and excluding anything ON PRINCIPLE that doesn't match, even if it is otherwise universally recognized, may feel good, but it is precisely that which prevents "communication."
I agree with you when it comes to parsing HTML web sites. It is a necessary evil to have to understand slang. But we should still endeavor to follow the W3C rules when we _write_ our web sites. Responding to your example, this would mean responding in proper English to American slang.
Today, I teach web development classes using the XHTML 1.0 strict DTD, even though I know the corporate student is going to walk back to the real world and immediately see a <FONT> element. I do have to explain why we must follow current standards rather that past anarchy. The bottom line -- the W3C is important to communication; otherwise we will have an example of HTML Babel (Gen. 11:9) on our hands.
_______________________________________________ plucker-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.rubberchicken.org/mailman/listinfo/plucker-list
