Re: [whatwg] Disclosure: Change of employer
On Tue, 4 Oct 2005, Rimantas Liubertas wrote: > > Congrats, and slightly off-topic - can you, please, push google to > make at least their first page valid? Thanks. I can't comment on Google's standards compliance, but hopefully I will be able to help. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E)\._.,--,'``.fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A/, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Re: [whatwg] Disclosure: Change of employer
> Although microsoft.com is valid, they don't really care about standards > that much. The site uses an HTML 4.0 Transitional DOCTYPE that triggers > quirks mode. Well, when site goes from hundreds of validation errors to valid page I wouldn't dare to say company doesn't care about standards. I'd call it an improvement. I do not see a problem with Transitional DOCTYPE - it is a part of the standards. At least they honestly adhere to what they declare - in that sense I prefer valid HTML Transitional to invalid XHTML. This is not to say that microsoft.com code is perfect, but I appreciate progress they have made (and MSN Search uses HTML4.01 strict). On the other hand Google is also fair - they do not declare any DOCTYPE, so technically they admit their code to be tag-soup. It is better than making false claims putting some DOCTYPE into code without any intention to validate. There are many technical subtleties, but please in mind my initial point - to show people who encounter web standards maybe for the first time that some big names _do care_ about web standards. If such giants as MS and Google both care that may encourage some web developer to pay more attention too. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/
Re: [whatwg] Disclosure: Change of employer
Rimantas Liubertas wrote:
microsoft.com and search.msn.com are valid
...nobody-cares-about-web-standards style of reasoning. "nobody" used
to mean microsoft ("web standards are irrelevant as long as M$
ignores them", now it appears to be google.
Although microsoft.com is valid, they don't really care about standards
that much. The site uses an HTML 4.0 Transitional DOCTYPE that triggers
quirks mode.
--
Lachlan Hunt
http://lachy.id.au/
Re: [whatwg] Disclosure: Change of employer
2005/10/4, Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Hi,
>
> As some of you may know, today I started work at Google. I will be working
> full time on standards work, including a significant portion of my time
> being spent on the WHATWG specifications.
<...>
Congrats, and slightly off-topic - can you, please, push google to
make at least their first page valid?
Whenever I advocate web standards there are inevitably people looking
what big names are doing.
When I throw my ace "look, microsoft.com and search.msn.com are valid
now!" they counter with "Ha! Take a look at google.com"...
Sure, validation is only a tool, but it would be great to cut the
nobody-cares-about-web-standards style of reasoning. "nobody" used to
mean microsoft ("web standards are irrelevant as long as M$ ignores
them", now it appears to be google.
Regards,
Rimantas
--
http://rimantas.com/
