In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Tim Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Rob Kendrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Fri, 05 Dec 2008 21:03:29 + (GMT) Tim Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Michael Drake
> > > <[EMAIL PRO
On 6 Dec 2008 Rob Kendrick wrote:
> Please note everybody that I said that validators serve no purpose in
> the development of web browsers. You and others appear to be confusing
> this with the development of web sites.
I think I made precisely that distinction.
> A browser that cannot render
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Rob Kendrick
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[Snip missed irony]
> The end.
Let's hope so.
--
Tim Hill,
www.timil.com
On Sat, 06 Dec 2008 10:24:59 + (GMT)
Tim Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So, we can all write our web sites in the most terribly convoluted
> html nonsense in the understanding that we don't have to worry
> because all web browser developers will take care of everything that
> may be wrong.
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Rob
Kendrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[Snip]
> I'd be all for people never mentioning validators here ever again. They
> serve no useful purpose for the development of web browsers.
That's such a bizarre statement I would frame it but for the fact this
isn't pap
On 6 Dec 2008 Rob Kendrick wrote:
> I'd be all for people never mentioning validators here ever again.
> They serve no useful purpose for the development of web browsers.
But they do provide a useful purpose for the development of web sites,
unless of course you'd prefer to have no standards at
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Rob
Kendrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd be all for people never mentioning validators here ever again.
> They serve no useful purpose for the development of web browsers.
Are they useful for anything? Have I been wasting my time making sure
that all my web pag
