- From: lilley <lilley@afs.mcc.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 13 Feb 1996 11:55:27 +0000 (GMT)
- To: megazone@livingston.com (MegaZone)
- Cc: eric@gauthier.centre.edu, www-html@w3.org, jonsm@aol.com
MegaZone said: > First of all, I've yet to see a validation system stay up to the minute > with new extensions. I don't think it is at all fair to penalize pages that > use extensions if the underlaying code is solid. How would you know if the underlying code is solid? The point is not to "penalise" pages that use extensions; the point is tosay in a succinct and machine readable way what extensions have been used. And the way to do that is: > And I don't expect anyone to start putting DOCTYPE notes in their pages. > I'm not going to, it's a pain in the ass to keep that stuff straight. Typing (or pasting) one line is "a pain in the ass to keep straight" ? > it shouldn't be necessary for browsers [...] Why should it > care about the DOCTYPE?> see above. > The web is an open playing field. If I decide to use <FONT COLOR="#rrggbb"> > on my pages, that's my decision. I know very well that only NS 2.0 will > use it. No you don't. There are several other browsers that understand that, and that particular extension does not originate with NS. > And I'll tell you how I've used it [...] These uses are all fine. The point is to give browsers an indication what extensions you have used. -- Chris Lilley, Technical Author and JISC representative to W3C +-------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Manchester and North Training & Education Centre ( MAN T&EC ) | +-------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Computer Graphics Unit, Email: Chris.Lilley@mcc.ac.uk | | Manchester Computing Centre, Voice: +44 161 275 6045 | | Oxford Road, Manchester, UK. Fax: +44 161 275 6040 | | M13 9PL BioMOO: ChrisL | | Timezone: UTC URI: http://info.mcc.ac.uk/CGU/staff/lilley/ | +-------------------------------------------------------------------+
Received on Tuesday, 13 February 1996 06:56:32 UTC