Hello Stephen,
> Bearing in mind the structure of the source code at present, how difficult
> would it be for purity to be turned on and off? That is, Explorer-isms or
> Netscape-isms are added when judged to be appropriate, but whether or not
> they are obeyed is user controlled.
This would be easy for e.g. the MIDDLE thing, but there are more
complicated issues which would require a fair amount of duplicate
code (and thus, development time).
In the end, I don't really see the sense of such an option -- I'd
agree with the sentiment that a browser's job is to show pages like
"they are intended to look", even if original webmangler is an, erm,
illiterate point&drool-class person. If you need a HTML validator, use
one.
Don't believe that I love the fact that today's web design requires
such kludges -- I *wish* I could simply bail out with a "Syntax error"
on crappy html, it would have made my job in the last years oh such much easier.
It's, sadly, not really an option.
Olli
--
Oliver Wagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://www.vapor.com/
_____________________________________________________________________
Voyager Mailing List - http://v3.vapor.com/
Voyager FAQ....: http://faq.vapor.com/voyager/
Listserver Help: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=HELP
Unsubscribe....: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=UNSUBSCRIBE
