Re: professionalism and wysiwyg

At 07:02 am 4/10/98 -0400, JustGio(at)aol.com wrote:
>W3C ...I suppose has its place........however as you pointed out the 2 major
>browsers will set their own standard no matter what W3C does ;-)
>personally I would rather just have the site work. If W3C wants to set the
>standard for validation ...perhaps they should take their que from the major
>market players.............whomever they happen to be.  

Well, lets ignore the fact that they are an independent body and can
probably react a little more objectively than Microsoft or Netscape!

They also provide a forum in which users can contribute to how things
should be.  Try giving Microsoft feedback and see how far you get!!

There are such a thing as "Standards" - specifications that companies can
try to achieve.  Whether they are superior or inferior to workplace
practices is often irrelevant (except for us poor soles trying to design
compatible websites :) they form a minimum "acceptable" operating platform.
 That is what the W3C is doing.

On top of that you have organisations and efforts like WASP - certainly
recommend checking out their website - that promote adherence to those
standards.

If I wanted to by cynical, I could very easily say "what is the point of
ISO 9000 accreditation for quality.  It does not ensure your
product/service is of _good_ quality, only that it is of _consistent_
quality.  There is a large parallel for validation.  Marketing (and $$$$$)
is the reason behind it's popularity.

Chris Higgs <c.higgs(at)landfood.unimelb.edu.au>
Gilbert Chandler College
http://www.landfood.unimelb.edu.au/

HWG hwg-theory mailing list archives, maintained by Webmasters @ IWA