> As you may have guessed, my post was partly > in response to the awful article in APC mag.
While I agree that the APC article needs a literary slapping as often as possible, I feel that Mr. Budd's devil's advocacy tries to sit on the fence too much when there's soft grass on one side of it and dirt on the other. You can still maintain objectivity while dismissing anti-web standards comments with a heavier hand if the argument is a logical one. Here's my two pence worth to this whole rhubarb: http://www.htmldog.com/ptg/archives/000049.php ---------------- Patrick Griffiths (PTG) http://www.htmldog.com/ptg/ http://www.htmldog.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andy Budd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, May 14, 2004 9:57 AM Subject: Re: [WSG] APC magazine anti standards article > Hey John, > > As you may have guessed, my post was partly in response to the awful > article in APC mag. > > http://www.andybudd.com/archives/2004/04/ > inciting_the_bile_of_the_web_standards_community/ > > I really didn't want it to become the definitive "anti CSS" article so > thought a more level headed look at the table vs CSS debate was > required. > > Andy Budd ***************************************************** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *****************************************************
