Duane Nelson wrote:
> I'm of the validation persuasion, because I lack the "theory" behind CSS > and HTML. By validating my code, which I learned I need to do from this > list, I have a foundation to fix the display behavior. This PNG fix > only affected IE browsers below version 6. I tried a new fix for > appwoodcraft.com because I thought it was better than my previous fix. > So to fix the validation issue, I took the "behavior" code out of my CSS > and went back to the JS fix from before. All understood. But I foresee one potential problem. If your static data (HTML, CSS) are valid, but you extend them using JavaScript, then unless you can re-validate the extended (static + dynamic) data, you are not really any better off than before. In fact, unless you be 100% certain that what your JavaScript generates is (a) consistent with your static data, (b) does exactly what you require (neither more not less), and (c) yields extended (static + dynamic) data that are still valid, then you may in fact be worse off. My two penn'orth. Philip Taylor ______________________________________________________________________ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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/
