On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 3:31 PM, Cristian Palmas wrote: > 2008/3/30, Bruno Fassino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > [1] http://brunildo.org/test/ImgThumbIBL.html > > > Bruno, > > I visited your link above. The page looks simple but good, but your > CSS does not validate because of the "display: -moz-inline-block;" > property and min-width assigned to a media.
Yes, the "display: -moz-inline-block" does not validate, it is a proprietary value used to get a sort of inline-block in Gecko 1.8. The media with min-width is used to help some versions of Opera. I think it validates as CSS level 3, choosing that option with the W3C validator this error should disappear. > I've always asked myself whether a CSS failed validation can create > problems in debugging or not. I'm not concerned with such specific (and "controlled") validation errors, but I agree with you that in general such hacks may create problems in the maintenance, more than in the debugging, of pages. Depending on the hack, one may have problems in future version of browsers. On the other hand hacking is sometimes necessary, so I'm not strongly against it. You can find much more info about "to hack or not to hack", may be starting from the wiki page [1]. > And even for XHTML failed validation: does it affect searche engines? I'm not an expert here, but I don't think search engines care too much about valid [X]HTML. Anyway (differently from CSS) there are few, if any, reasons to have invalid markup. Best regards, Bruno [1] http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=ToHackOrNotToHack -- Bruno Fassino http://www.brunildo.org/test ______________________________________________________________________ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
