Re: Spyglass HTML Validator 1.0 Availability

Sunil Mishra (
Fri, 18 Oct 1996 10:58:46 -0400 (EDT)

Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 10:58:46 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <>
From: Sunil Mishra <>
In-reply-to: <v02140b09ae8c2525e9f4@[]> (
Subject: Re: Spyglass HTML Validator 1.0 Availability

\\ on one's pages (as noted by TBL). Those content providers that choose to
\\ follow standards (a conservative route) can be guaranteed that their
\\ content will be displayed correctly, and they take advantage of these
\\ wonderful, free browsers to boot. There's no damage being done here: the
\\ tools gradually get better, and those who don't use the latest gizmo (such
\\ as frames or JavaScript) can pretty much ignore the noise and simply USE
\\ THE WEB. If you're there for the content, you don't give a hoot about the
\\ glitz. I really don't need or want to have content barking, blinking and
\\ barfing, I just want to read it. That is, if it's worth reading.
\\ Murray

I'm sure you know that's not the case with frames. There are plenty of
pages out there that don't have much in the <noframes> section. People are
inherently lazy, at least I know I am.

I don't have any problem with netscape or microsoft innovating. However,
both have been rather irresponsible in how they have chosen to design and
implement their innovations. Quite frankly, most are poorly thought out
hacks. The same *could* be said for some of the older HTML tags. I don't
like the idea of <h1>..<h6>, for instance. It's an inherent limit on the
number of headlines that can be present.