On 11/28/05, Jeremy David <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 11/28/05, Eric Faurot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 11/28/05, Jeremy David <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > The website is hacky, invalid, and broken. > > > > broken? which page? which browser? > > Hi. Thanks for joining the conversation, Eric. > > I appreciate your question, but I believe to cite a particular page > which doesn't work as intended on a particular browser would be to > miss the point.
I just wanted to point that your original argument was wrong. You said "fix it because it is broken for people", which is not true. > What is means when the HTML code is invalid is that you're inviting > unpredictability. Sure, it might look ok in this version of Firefox, > but what about the next version of FIrefox? Or the 2007 edition of > Konquerer? The only way to make sure that your HTML code will not > cause an unpredictable fault in a browser now, or in the future is to > make the code valid. I fully agree. When that happens, action will be taken by someone who decides it is "then" a priority. > Making the code valid now will save you a lot of trouble in the future > when, hypothetically, Firefox 2 is released and it chokes and dies on > this particular piece of invalid code. Why wait around until it > breaks? The best way to handle the problem is to fix it now, so that > you don't have to rush and fix it when it crashes and burns later. Why fix it if it is not broken? (not broken means readable by a human). There again the keyword is "hypothetic". Also, I think major browsers will continue to be extremly lenient wrt to html code for a long time for three reasons: - lots of content is hand generated, which means error-prone, and for a browser writer, rejecting non-valid pages is not an option. - no one will use a browser that will refuse to render their favorite online banking/shopping/chatting site, where html is often far far for correct. - the code to 'normalize' the structure is already there, and working well enough, so why would they throw it away? Again, I'm all for standards and good design and all, but this is simply not an issue for the OpenBSD team now. Browsers should be the ones putting efforts in respecting standards first. Microsoft takes part of the W3 specification working groups, and then they impose us that utter crap called IE? Come on... Eric.
