Re: Browsers and syntax errors (Was: Captions for Figures...)

web@sowebo.charm.net
Fri, 10 Mar 1995 10:19:53 -0500 (EST)


From: web@sowebo.charm.net
Message-Id: <9503101020.AA05590@sowebo.charm.net>
Subject: Re: Browsers and syntax errors (Was: Captions for Figures...)
To: steinarb@falch.no
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 1995 10:19:53 -0500 (EST)
Cc: www-html@www10.w3.org
In-Reply-To: <9503101314.AA07245@flame.falch.no> from "Steinar Bang" at Mar 10, 95 08:22:19 am

Steinar Bang wrote:
>[...] 
> Making browsers forgiving about HTML syntax errors, instead of giving
> good user feedback, is probably the gravest error committed by the
> browser writers.

	I agree - especially since I've recently been beaten up for
	displaying the validation_logo on a page (or two) that didn't
	conform to HTML 2.0. Obviously enough, one shouldn't do that,
	and I never meant to, but like any decent programmer, I have a 
	pet gremlin with a cruel sense of humour. I need all the help I
	can get. A discreet little flag on the browser, and markers in
	the View Source window to the offending places, would be wonderful.

	Hmmm.. maybe browsers could have a "developer mode".. Dan has
	suggested I should use something like CVS so that stuff doesn't
	get released without an automatic validation step, and I agree,
	if I were a better person with more time to do everything right..
	(and I must admit, I've never been particularly good with that kind
	of system. sorry).

	..but what worries me, is if I, a professional programmer, trying
	to Do the Right Thing, find it hard - then what hope is there of
	getting the hordes to care about ValidHTML?? Browser writers,
	pls give us a "development mode".
>[...] 
> Verification services like the one Dan Connoly used to provide (did
> you take it with you to W3, Dan?) can help some, but they will never
> affect Joe Homepage who thinks that his homepage looks soo K00L in
> Netscape and doesn't understand the complaints about bogus HTML people
> keep sending him.
> 
	Right on!
	While I'm here - can anyone pls tell me, why *do* I need to keep
	turning <b> on and off, to skip over paragraph, list, and other
	such tags? Some documents, like some of the WDVL pages, I really 
	*do* want to be bold. Presentation issue, I know, and hurrah for
	style sheets, and some may say I shouldn't use <b> so much, but I
	still wonder, is there some reason for being required to keep on
	toggling <b> ?? And before you flame me, just go out and look at
	all the documents out there that simple turn on <b> (or better
	still, <h3> or some other) and leave it on. I suspect it's the
	biggest single cause of non-conformant documents.

	Alan.
      ___________________________________________________________________
      Dr.Web@Stars.com -=*<URL:http://WWW.Stars.com/>*=- 1 (301) 552 0272
      Web Developer's Virtual Library * CyberWeb SoftWare * WWW Databases
      HTML * CGI * Training * Transatlantic Liaison * Per Ardua, Ad Astra