W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > May 2004

Re: strict

From: David Dorward <david@dorward.me.uk>
Date: Sat, 29 May 2004 09:06:46 +0100
To: PWP - Information <info@professionalwebpages.biz>
Cc: www-validator@w3.org
Message-Id: <1085818006.11174.11.camel@localhost>

On Sat, 2004-05-29 at 08:43, PWP - Information wrote:
> David,

Uh oh... 

> you do not have to put that image there,

I know that, but I wasn't the one complaining about it being invalid
(which, as I said, it wasn't). You are responding to the wrong person...

Here's a little hint about email for you.

Traditionally in email one quotes the material from a PREVIOUS poster by
prefixing each line with a > character. The number of >s indicate the
level of quoting.

This new thing of quoting the entire previous message without
indentation prefixed by "----- Original Message -----" is a hard-to-read
recent "innovation" and a lot of people using @w3.org use the older and
more sensible style of using email.

> why do you not put your own image or link?

I don't see the need for it, I just make a standards statement instead.

> try something like what i have on www.professionalwebpages.biz (right
> at the bottom of the page)

Oh dear. You really should read Appendix C of the XHTML 1.0
Specification. If a browser ever handles your page as real XHTML your
JavaScript is going to stop working. 

Its quite cunning[2] the way you hide all your invalid code in

And <em><strong>Professional Web Pages complete list</strong></em> is a
masterpeice - a section of text that is emphasised, strongly emphasised

OK, I'm going to stop here (note to self - don't let yourself be tempted
into auditing websites for free, its too profitable).

[2] This is sarcasm by the way

David Dorward       <http://blog.dorward.me.uk/>   <http://dorward.me.uk/>
Received on Saturday, 29 May 2004 04:07:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 14:17:41 UTC