Joseph R. B. Taylor wrote:
Rules are meant to be understood and for the most part followed.
Sometimes they're meant to be bent/broken a little, when it comes to
document design, occasionally the ends can justify the means.
That's how the whole tables-used-for-layout tag soup of last century
came about - isn't it? Aren't Standards about, well - standards?
Would I do it? No. The visual effect you are hoping to achieve is
easy enough to do. It's just a box with a heading after all.
Indeed.
Jackie Reid wrote:
> I will say this though ...i think its a shame that when someone takes
the time to respond to a question and states their point of view only
to get shot down in flames and virtually abused. This list is here to
enable us to discuss the implementation of webstandards amongst like
minded people and I'm sure no one is really "hell-bent on abusing the
standards".
I agree. There's a whole range of abilities represented by the, what,
5000 members? - and some are simply asking because *they don't know*. A
little patience goes a long way - have a coffee before replying? (I'm
guilty, too - I know.)
Mind you, those Return Receipts posted back to the list make me grit my
teeth...
N
___________________________
omnivision. websight.
http://www.omnivision.com.au/
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
