- From: Jelks Cabaniss <jelks@jelks.nu>
- Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2002 13:56:54 -0500
- To: <www-html@w3.org>
Andrew McFarland wrote: > >This is 2002 (not 1994), which makes one wonder whether this whole > >thing isn't just a giant parody of hypocrisy (at best)... > > In any organization with more than one person there will be > different opinions. Almost certainly, all the W3 member > organizations have people who go for HTML that `works' > rather than HTML that is valid. "Works" and "Valid" aren't mutually exclusive! :) But there is yet no killer app which *requires* valid (much less well-formed) markup in web pages. Until (and *if*!) there is, and the Dreamweavers and Frontpages perceive such a need, valid markup will remain the domain of an miniscule niche. It also doesn't help in that a) SGML was deemed unwieldy for markup-for-the-web, and b) XML's foundations are being demolished and rebuilt as we speak It will be a long time coming before the Dawn. ... :) /Jelks
Received on Monday, 25 February 2002 13:57:34 UTC