On Monday 10 November 2003 10:22, Oron Peled wrote: <nitpicking sniped> Yes, I agree with all of what you said up until now. standards are important, fix the browsers, bla bla. I was just stating the facts.
> > ... and also a lot of pages that will completly fail any validator but > > still work reasonably well. > > Reasonably well in what sense? "I can read them OK on Sundays > if the moon is full and my Konqi version is Y?" No - you know what I mean so stop flaming. take for example the much talked about Bank Hapoalim web site. it works and is usable with gecko based browsers, but its not pretty and some texts are shown reverse. that's what I mean when I say reasonably well. I could go further and state that there are pages that FOSS browsers render exactly as the author intendeded, while at the same time if you call Validator on them you'd get screens full of errors. <more nitpicking sniped> > The validator, only the validator, nothing but the validator! yea, yea, of course. and still you can't reasonably expect that all web sites in the entire world will be made to be 100% validator friendly. I'd still expeect that I would be able to use my favorite web browser to view them. My point (which you managed to completly miss and distort), is that while a list of sites that do not conform to W3 validator would be nice (and would probably encompass 99.9% of Israeli web sites), a list of web sites that aren't usable on FOSS web browsers, as Amichai suggested, would be much more useful (and smaller). -- Oded ::.. "I'm all for computer dating, but I wouldn't want one to marry my sister." ================================================================= To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
