RE: <I tried not to!> <more>

No. No and No.

Jennifer. Don't quit. You're not senile, and we *all* love you (unless of
course, you are actually a guy!).

:-)
Fuzzy.

Seriously. I guess my message about dissimilar similarities will show up on
the list pretty soon. Seeing your response tells me I was right on target
(for a change!) with my assumption:

We are confusing browser support for elements with validity of those elements.

It's *common* to find a browser that will not support ~some~ element of a
ratified  (by W3) standard. What is important is that when that encounter
occurs, there is no negative impact in terms of the pages stability and
reliability. Using standards compliant code gives us the ability to assure
that is the case every time (every page we write).

Take a look at this page (it's one of my faves :-)), it's done to HTML 2.0.
Look at it in the _newest_ browser you can find:

http://www.earth.com/bad-style/why-validate.html

Now, take a look at this page, it's done in HTML 4.0, with the _oldest_
browser you can find:

http://www.hwg.org/

See? Both of them work flawlessly even when using browsers completely
"inappropriate" for the content.

Gosh. Validation RULES !
<giggle>
Fuzzy.


At 05:10 PM 7/27/00 -0400, Jennifer C. Swartz wrote:
>Fuzzy stated:
>2) I hereby openly challenge you to name ONE element/feature/tag/aspect of
>a ratified (by w3) standard that renders ANY page unaccessible to ANY
>browser.
>
>I accept your challenge and state... AOL browser 2.7 for the Mac does not
>support tables...
>
>However, I am confused about the next example... I thought I had identified
>another attribute (bgcolor in tables) that is not viewable in certain
>browsers but still validates under 3.2... I looked at the 3.2 standards and
>cannot find table back ground color discussed anywhere however it is
>deprecated in 4.0...
>
>I guess I am one of those woefully misinformed people because I could have
>sworn this attribute was part of 3.2.  So, not only have I put my foot in my
>mouth I am more confused than I was before.. Maybe my understanding of HTML
>is not what I thought it was?  Maybe I am starting to go senile and
>remembering things that never happened?  Maybe I should get out of the
>business, who knows...
>
>Jennifer C. Swartz
__________________________________________________________________
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