Re: Browser Features

 In a word? "Politics"

It is an effort to ease transition from an old standard to a new one, thus
by it's nature it is transient. 

Given the (theoretical) compliance of browser "manufacturers" to basic
standards as set forth by the W3 to allow "everyone" baseline functionality
when interacting with the WWW. And the time involved to create and compile
"major" new browser versions, it only makes sense for the "manufacturer" to
compile ~new~ code that is compliant with the next _ standard _. See what I
mean? It makes no sense to sit down and write a new browser to parse a
transitional DTD fully.

I don't think anyone here would argue the statement:

The 4.x *transitional* DTD is not intended as a long term substitute for a
4.0 (strict) DTD. This same line of thinking applies to all the
transitional DTD's.

Who remembers "Cougar"? Talk about ~transitional~ - whew!

HTH,
Fuzzy



At 03:01 PM 12/6/00 -0600, Shawn Sass wrote:
><<"Captain F.M. O'Lary" wrote:  First: DO NOT use a "transitional" DTD
>~ever~.>>
>
>Why does the w3c allow transitional DTDs if you shouldn't use them?
>
>Just curious
>
>:-|   <---- attempt at "curious" face
>-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
>      _________________
>     _\ |-| /\ \/\/ /\/
>o-o Shawn Sass-Graphic Artist
>o-o-o-o-o-o-o Sportsstuff Inc
>o- http://www.sportsstuff.com
>o-o-o- 1-888-814-8833 ext 241
>
______________________________________________________________
Captain F.M. O'Lary
webmaster(at)canopy.net
Somedays it's just not worth chewing through the restraints...
------------------------------------------------------------------

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