On 11/28/05, J.C. Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 10:29:43 -0500, Jeremy David > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >There are 5 errors on the main page alone. That means that no matter how > >useful the content on the website is, the code breaks down for a lot of > >people. Standards are important. Where HTML is concerned, they're doubly so, > >because there are so many different clients (browsers) being used by so many > >different kinds of people. > > Jeremy, > > I encourage you to do a bit more research before posting something like > the above. Did you really think the compliance errors were never noticed > before you pointed them out? > > Yes, you are right that the site is not perfectly W3C standards > compliant. The point you missed is the overwhelming majority of clients > (browsers) are *ALSO* not compliant with the standards. The supposed > "errors" you pointed out are nothing more than work-arounds for > non-compliant browsers. Contrary to your claims, those supposed "errors" > do not "break" anything, instead they actually _FIX_ problems in buggy > browsers.
Hi. Thanks for your response, JCR. I understand that the errors were committed wilfully, but that doesn't make them any more desirable or good. As an experienced web coder, I can assure you that not only are there ways to code websites validly and correctly that work in "buggy browsers" (We're probably both talking about IE here) but that this is the preferred and best way to do it among people who spend a great deal of time working on problems such as this. The only way to make sure that HTML code will work for all web browsers now, a year from now, and 4 years from now, is to adhere to the accepted standards. Those standards will be around in 5 years, and will ensure that you don't have to do a redesign every couple years to un-hack and re-hack your old hacks. If you're using a browser that expects valid code, and your feed it invalid code, there is really no way to predict how the invalid code is going to affect your web browser. Sure, it might look cool in a buggy browser like IE, but what about lynx? Firefox? What about Konquerer? What about the next version of Konquerer? Buggy code opens up all sorts of unpredictability. Even if it happens to work now on a couple computers you checked, there's no way to be sure that it works correctly on every computer, or that it will continue to work on every computer in the future. Buggy code is no way to solve a problem. Correct valid code is the way to go. As for the "web browsers" that are buggy (and I use the term lightly because if a web browser doesn't adhere to the World Wide *Web* standards, then it's not really a *web* browser is it?), there are ways to make your code valid, *and* have them still work in the buggy browsers. That's they way I do it on my websites, and that's the right way to do it. - Jeremy
