https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=52253
--- Comment #2 from Tim Starling <[email protected]> --- (In reply to comment #1) > I'm tempted to say this is an issue with said badly written clients, not > MediaWiki, and therefore this is invalid... It's not about technical correctness, it's about courtesy. Yes, there are hundreds of clients that are broken in this way, and it is the fault of the hundreds of developers who individually wrote those clients, but the easiest place to fix the problem is in MediaWiki and the WMF frontend. In any case, client compatibility is an essential part of developing web server software. If the site was completely broken in IE or Firefox, you wouldn't say the bug was invalid. The only difference is scale -- whether we should care about the long tail of badly-written HTML parsers. I am saying that we should care. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Wikibugs-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l
