Some people write as if there were a club, a them and us, people who get it and people who don't, and never the twain shall meet.
My original post was not meant to seperate 'standardistas' from the rest of the industry.
It's just that I thought Standards Were the Way Things Were Done by Everyone (TM), and then I came across a huge article about a website that fit the qualification of 'Failed Redesign' (these things didn't really exist).
I wanted to understand why this happened. Is standards only really something a small contingent of geeky developers go for?
The more I look around at redesigns, I notice that more are failed than not. Sunbeam, Shiels Jewellry, VideoEzy, etc, etc, etc. Very few are standards compliant.
I don't think there is a them and us, because I think even people on this list are creating Failed Redesigns. There are quite a few on this list, and yet very few successful redesigns.
Surely it's a matter of trade-offs that people weigh up and make a decision about, and have their reasons for doing so. Not that long ago there was advice to add in all the proprietary attributes within the body element to make it work in all browsers.
Wouldn't it be better to be straightforwards and honest about the reasons for the trade-off decisions and their results?
Kat ****************************************************** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ******************************************************
