Mr. Wilson's Rotolok Example

Michael Channing Wilson wrote:
>This whole thing is not really an issue with me. If I can meet
>validation and Bobby recommendations on a site that's great! (see
>http://www.rotolok.com - very minor validation errors) If it causes me
>too much time or problems in obtaining a certain look that my client is
>shooting for, well then I'll have to get over it and so will everyone
>else.

Okay, I took a look at it, and validated it.

The validation errors can be seen at:

http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.rotolok.com%2F

I downloaded a copy of the page, fixed the errors, and added a <BASE
HREF="http://www.rotolok.com"> element.

The fixed page can be found at:

http://www.idyllmtn.com/~kynn/misc/rotolok.html

Validation results at:

http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.idyllmtn.com%2F%7Ekynn%2Fmisc%2Frotolok.html

I certainly can't see any difference in the two files as far as
display on my browsers.  (In fact, on one browser, my version actually
works better than yours.)  Thus I'm not sure why your creative
freedom is threatened by making the site valid instead of invalid.
What creative advantage is granted by the invalid code?

I remain unconvinced that "a valid HTML page is a boring HTML
page!" is a true statement.

--
Kynn Bartlett  <kynn(at)idyllmtn.com>             http://www.idyllmtn.com/~kynn/
Chief Technologist & Co-Owner, Idyll Mountain Internet; Fullerton, California
Enroll now for my online stylesheets (CSS) class! http://www.hwg.org/classes/
The voice of the future?   http://www.hwg.org/opcenter/w3c/voicebrowsers.html

HWG hwg-theory mailing list archives, maintained by Webmasters @ IWA