Re: The Final Word on Browsers and the Future

Abigail (abigail@ny.fnx.com)
Sat, 19 Oct 1996 22:12:42 -0400 (EDT)


Message-Id: <199610200212.WAA07762@melgor.ny.fnx.com>
Subject: Re: The Final Word on Browsers and the Future
To: www-html@w3.org
Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 22:12:42 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Abigail" <abigail@ny.fnx.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.95.961019111722.4243A-100000@ns.viet.net> from "Benjamin Franz" at Oct 19, 96 11:19:57 am

Benjamin Franz wrote:
++ 
++ On 19 Oct 1996, Peter Flynn wrote:
++ 
++ > I do the same, and even edit their HTML into shape to help them
++ > understand how they can achieve what they want _and_ remain compatible
++ > with the rest of the world. Works wonders on a few occasions.
++ > 
++ > OK, how about a browser which would perform a rough parse and
++ > _automatically_ mail the webmaster (or the author, if identified) with
++ > the list of errors? I've been asked countless times if this exists
++ > (no) and if I'd like to make it a part of WebMail (not yet).
++ 
++ If you do this, webmasters will simply lock out your browser. Many sites
++ have *NO* central content control (think Netcom NOT Digital). The
++ webmaster is concerned with *keeping the site running* not *what people
++ put up* (unless it affects the server operation via usage overload for
++ example). 
++ 
++ IOW: Automatic mailing by web browsers is a *BAD IDEA*.

I agree. If you want such a mail feature, look for a <link rev=made ...>
tag. But then, people including such tags usually don't have to be
reminded of the effects of invalid HTML.


Abigail