Re: W3C Validation
by "Captain F.M. O'Lary" <ctfuzzy(at)canopy.net>
|
| Date: |
Wed, 14 Feb 2001 15:58:02 -0500 |
| To: |
"Ted Temer" <temer(at)c-zone.net>,
"HWGBASICS" <hwg-basics(at)hwg.org> |
| References: |
vartec home |
| |
todo: View
Thread,
Original
|
|
GREAT Job Ted !!!
Heck, I don't even want to argue about it (but don't get used to it).
I would like to add to it a little if I may:
You can in fact write your very own "official" DTD.
No kidding. Does that add to the confusion or what?
I tell myself that it is because of this potential confusion that all of
the browsers I have ever met (personally) do an absolutely ~horrible~ job
of "reaching out" and getting the definition the URI (that is included in
every dtd) points to.
As a matter of fact, when I was last foolish enough to spend a few
(million) hours experimenting with my own dtd's (yes, once I was young and
crazy) I was _ unable _ to get the browser to go get the definition the dtd
called when the browser and the definition were on the same LAN - about
85-90% of the time it failed!!!!!!!!!
Just a little dtd trivia for you all!
HTH,
Fuzzy.
______________________________________________________________
Captain F.M. O'Lary
webmaster(at)canopy.net
Copywight 2001 Elmer Fudd. All wights wesewved.
------------------------------------------------------------------
HTML: hwg-basics mailing list archives,
maintained by Webmasters @ IWA