Dissimilar Similarities

It took me a half-hour to think of that subject for this message, I hope
you enjoy it :-)


Just today the list has seen a near miss or two regarding all this
validation stuff. The near miss I feel is in regard to two different things:

1) Compliance with standards as ratified by the W3.

2) Support of all the elements comprising said standard.


Please don't get the two confused. Just because standard 4.X says CSS (or
whatever) is written correctly ~does not~ mean that _any_ CSS elements will
be supported by ~any~ browser.

In that respect (also I guess) the browser manufacturers are completely
free to include or exclude support for any element what - so - ever.

What all this does mean though is that #1 up there is the most important.
Here's why: By writing standards compliant code you can rest assured that
whatever you include that is _not_ supported by the browser will degrade
gracefully and reliably, as opposed to possibly locking up the viewers
browser or OS.

Personally, I think that is the best reason on earth to use valid code
exclusively. But anyway . . . 

SO . . . don't confuse standards compliant code with meaning that everyone
can see/hear/touch/click/smell every element you include in your page. It
means that if you ~don't~ have a smell enabled browser, the site may not
smell, but it won't stink either.

HTH,
Fuzzy
__________________________________________________________________
Captain F.M. O'Lary
webmaster(at)canopy.net
sysop(at)mail.ruediger.leon.k12.fl.us
sysop(at)mail.woodville.leon.k12.fl.us
Member of the HTML Writers Guild and 
International Webmasters Association
------------------------------------------------------------------

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