"Mike Meyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > "Mike Schilling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> "Mike Meyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message >> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> "Mike Schilling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>>> What matters in generating HTML is which browsers you want to support >>>> and >>>> what they understand. Standards and recommendations are both >>>> irrelevant. >>> Unless, of course, you want to support any compliant browser. >> Since no browser I know of is perfectly compliant (e.g. bug-free), that's >> not a feasible goal. > > I guess you'd say developing any software isn't a feasible goal, > because it'll never be bug-free, will never have bug-free compilers to > compile it, bug-free linkers to link it, bug-free GUI/db/etc libraries > to link with it, bug-free servers to communicate with, and bug-free > operating systems to run it on. Fortunately, most developers aren't > quite that anal, and realize that you can get useful work done in a > less-than-perfect environment.
I'm not speaking theroetically. My company (though not me personally) creates browser-based UIs, and one of the biggest expenses has been dealing with IE rendering bugs Given the market share of IE, the fact that something should work, and even does work in Firefox, Opera, etc, is irrelevant. If it breaks IE, we can't use it. When we've had similar issues with C++ compilers, patches have usually been forthcoming, or perhaps optimization has to be turned off on a few source files. In a few areas, though, the solution has been "Don't do that", and again, the fact that the standard supports it is irrelevant. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
