Re: Conformance ratings (was: Extra! Microsoft beats Netscape in the

lilley (
Tue, 13 Feb 1996 11:55:27 +0000 (GMT)

From: lilley <>
Message-Id: <>
Subject: Re: Conformance ratings (was: Extra! Microsoft beats Netscape in the
To: (MegaZone)
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 1996 11:55:27 +0000 (GMT)
In-Reply-To: <> from "MegaZone" at Feb 12, 96 06:26:04 pm

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: |
| Manchester Computing Centre,        Voice: +44 161 275 6045       |
| Oxford Road, Manchester, UK.          Fax: +44 161 275 6040       |
| M13 9PL                            BioMOO: ChrisL                 |
| Timezone: UTC        URI: |