Re: Processing instructions for style tweaks?

Glenn Adams (glenn@stonehand.com)
Sat, 3 Dec 94 15:15:39 -0500


Message-Id: <9412032015.AA24183@trubetzkoy.metis.com>
From: Glenn Adams <glenn@stonehand.com>
Date: Sat,  3 Dec 94 15:15:39 -0500
To: patrick@voyager.gate.net
Subject: Re: Processing instructions for style tweaks?
Cc: Multiple recipients of list <www-html@www0.cern.ch>


  Date: Sat, 3 Dec 1994 00:30:06 +0100
  From: patrick@voyager.gate.net (Patrick Stickler)

  that furthermore, browsers become
  strict in their parsing of HTML document instances, notifying the
  user/reader when a document instance is invalid (rather than trying to
  guess around the HTML errors).

In keeping with a fundamental tenet of the Internet (or at least one
that used to hold), the WWW should be "conservative in transmitting,
and liberal in receiving."  According to this view, the HTTP servers
should be the component which ensures that only valid HTML is transmitted.

So we need to bang on the server builders/providers! However, if a
few popular browswers validated prior to display, it would put pressure
on the server/data providers.

The practical problem with putting a validator in the browser is size
and performance penalties.  I think this is another argument for pushing
validation onto the server.

-- Glenn Adam