Re: GNU/Linux Compatible Initiative

2003-11-10 Thread Oded Arbel
On Monday 10 November 2003 08:25, Tal, Shachar wrote: I believe w3c.org has an HTML/XHTML/strict etc. validator online, so this can be verified online by users How about starting, through Hamakor, some kind of a rating / certification system for Israeli Web sites to check if they are

Re: GNU/Linux Compatible Initiative

2003-11-10 Thread Oron Peled
On Monday 10 November 2003 09:23, Oded Arbel wrote: ... one major problem with W3 validator (and the people who keep refering to it as a compatibility testing tool ;-) is that it has a very high Signal/Noise ratio. It complains about a lot of stuff that browsers today take for granted and

Re: GNU/Linux Compatible Initiative

2003-11-10 Thread Oded Arbel
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

Re: GNU/Linux Compatible Initiative

2003-11-10 Thread Shachar Shemesh
Oded Arbel wrote: 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. And will those pages work with PDA browsers? How about brile browsers for

Re: GNU/Linux Compatible Initiative

2003-11-10 Thread Oron Peled
On Monday 10 November 2003 11:27, Oded Arbel wrote: 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. No. But their deviation can be *objectively* determined. My point (which you managed to completly

Re: GNU/Linux Compatible Initiative

2003-11-10 Thread Oded Arbel
On Monday 10 November 2003 12:12, Shachar Shemesh wrote: 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. It's easier to conform to one browser (the validator) than to each and every browser out

Re: GNU/Linux Compatible Initiative

2003-11-10 Thread Oded Arbel
On Monday 10 November 2003 12:24, Oron Peled wrote: So, yes for FOSS compliant list if it includes a the correct guidline for compliance: Validate your site against the validator, and you'll save time validating against multitude of browsers/versions I'll make sure to include this guideline

Re: GNU/Linux Compatible Initiative

2003-11-10 Thread Idan Sofer
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Monday 10 November 2003 11:27, you wrote: 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

Re: GNU/Linux Compatible Initiative

2003-11-10 Thread Ely Levy
that's what w3c is for, they also have validators on their site to check if the site is compatible. Ely Levy System group Hebrew University Jerusalem Israel On Sun, 9 Nov 2003, Amichai Rotman wrote: Hi Linuxers, How about starting, through Hamakor, some kind of a rating / certification

Re: GNU/Linux Compatible Initiative

2003-11-10 Thread Ely Levy
Maybe some opensource browsers doesn't support teh standart well but then you need to send a bug report to the project not change the site there are way too many opensource browsers and there would be a lot more of them. You cant go by the whims of each browser or blame sites for bad programming

RE: GNU/Linux Compatible Initiative

2003-11-10 Thread meorero
Isn't there a black-list at Mozilla.org.il ? i mean: http://www.mozilla.org.il/evangel.shtml Oren Maurer --- Walla! Mail, Get Your Private, Free E-mail from Walla! at: http://mail.walla.co.il

Re: GNU/Linux Compatible Initiative

2003-11-10 Thread Oded Arbel
On Monday 10 November 2003 13:14, Ely Levy wrote: and personaly I very much disagree with khtml way of imitating ie behavor instead of not displaying webpage which is not by the standart I of course completly disagree. by definition a browser should always make a best effort in trying to

Re: GNU/Linux Compatible Initiative

2003-11-10 Thread Oded Arbel
On Monday 10 November 2003 13:15, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Isn't there a black-list at Mozilla.org.il ? i mean: http://www.mozilla.org.il/evangel.shtml Yes, and its a very good list, unfortunatly it only checks for Mozilla compliance. I would really like a list that also checks for other

Re: GNU/Linux Compatible Initiative

2003-11-10 Thread Oron Peled
On Monday 10 November 2003 13:42, Oded Arbel wrote: I of course completly disagree. by definition a browser should always make a best effort in trying to display a web page, no matter how broken it is. Sure thing. Content consumers (web browsers) should as lenient as possible, but we are

Re: GNU/Linux Compatible Initiative

2003-11-10 Thread Gil Freund
Oded Arbel wrote: On Monday 10 November 2003 13:15, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Isn't there a black-list at Mozilla.org.il ? i mean: http://www.mozilla.org.il/evangel.shtml Yes, and its a very good list, unfortunatly it only checks for Mozilla compliance. I would really like a list that also

GNU/Linux Compatible Initiative

2003-11-09 Thread Amichai Rotman
Hi Linuxers, How about starting, through Hamakor, some kind of a rating / certification system for Israeli Web sites to check if they are GNU/Linux / Open Source friendly. I mean, can be viewed with GNU/Linux tools (like Konqueror, Mozilla etc.) without any special changes. Maybe Web sites

RE: GNU/Linux Compatible Initiative

2003-11-09 Thread Tal, Shachar
- From: Amichai Rotman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 09, 2003 10:32 PM To: Linux-IL Subject: GNU/Linux Compatible Initiative Hi Linuxers, How about starting, through Hamakor, some kind of a rating / certification system for Israeli Web sites to check