W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > November 1999


From: Walter Ian Kaye <walter@natural-innovations.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 20:15:49 -0800
Message-Id: <v04220807b46a4d7f5c08@[]>
To: www-html@w3.org
At 04:02p -0500 11/30/99, B.K. DeLong wrote:
>At 05:25 PM 11/28/99 -0500, Ambrose Li wrote:
>  >Just go to any engineering society or standards association and see
>  >what kind of HTML they use (junk basically) and you can extrapolate
>  >what will happen. If even these people don't care, no one will care.
>  >I don't expect things to change with XML/XHTML. Changing standards
>  >isn't a solution; the correct solution is education.
>Even so, a German company released a new product today that contains an
>XHTML tool that checks for valid and well-formed XML/XHTML.

Sounds good -- but as Ambrose says, many people just don't care. IOW, it's
not a technical problem, it's a social one. No RFCs cover that!
98% of HTML web sites are crap. What percentage of XHTML or XML web sites
will be crap as well, due to this social problem? My guess: 74%.

>Check it out:



results in

                                     ','MOZQUTIO.ORG - Mozquito',' (p1 of 36)

    ]*>$/.test(txt)) };function iscompl(txt) { return (/\/>$/.test(txt))
    };function isopen(txt) { return (/^<(\w.*)?[^\/]>/.test(txt))
    };function isclose(txt) { return (/^<\//.test(txt)) };function
    ishtml(txt) { return (/^<\/?html:/.test(txt)) };var tmpVal = "";var
    tagOpen = false;var tagComplete = false;var first = true;for (var i=0;

and so on for the rest of the document. Guess I won't be downloading it yet.
The main home page seems to be well-formed XHTML though! <g>

Received on Tuesday, 30 November 1999 23:17:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:05:51 UTC