Re: HTML 4.01 Transitional vs. HTML 3.2 Final

> I obviously disagree with you - big time. But rather than get into a
pissin
> match over the whole message I would just like to ask a question that will
> clarify it all, I think.

>Where do ~all~ browser manufacturers get the baseline "rules" that are
>absolutely mandatory in order for them to produce their product in a way
>that allows it to interact with the web like everyone else's browser does?

As if any browser out there has implemented every function that the
consortium has come up with.  That's why there are lawsuits flying around
and the DOJ breathing down Bill Gate's neck.  MS just paid Netscape 20
million because of shoddy JS support in I.E.  Do you really think MS will
bow down to the W3C?  Who's going to make them?  They are 80% of the browser
world.

You very conveniently tap danced around the bulk of my email where I point
out that 3.2 Strict is not a legal binding standard.  It's more a
suggestion.

> over 99% of my customers come back to me exclusively for their web work.

Mine too. What's your point?  What works for you is fine by me.  Do what
you're doing if that works for you.  That doesn't mean it works for everyone
everywhere.  Why do you feel you need to make the rest of us do what you do?

People come to me for solutions, not to have me preach to them from the W3C
bible.  They don't care beans about that.  They see things and they ask for
them. If I can't deliver, they go to the next guy or gal.

 I used to try to talk them out of some of these things.  You can watch
their eyes glaze over when you try to change their minds.  I won't go so far
as to say the customer is always right, but they do pay the bills...

> It is very,very,very much in the best interest of my business to promote
> the use of bleeding edge proprietary markup to the very best of my ability
> on this list or any other public forum I can throw my hat into. Because I
> am *specifically* in the business of fixing that crap once they realize I
> did indeed know what I was talking about, despite that fact it ran
contrary
> to "conventional" wisdom.

Saying "very" over and over and referring to someone else's work as "crap"
is not part of a logical discussion.  Who's talking about bleeding edge.  JS
and CSS are not bleeding edge.  They have both been around for years.

>From there your email really goes downhill.  Sorry if I ruffled your
feathers,  I am not against standards, but I am against having them jammed
down my throat.  You're entitled to your opinions, I fought for that right.
I believe I get to have an opinion too???

Paul Wilson
webgooru(at)gte.net

HTML: hwg-basics mailing list archives, maintained by Webmasters @ IWA