W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > April 2007

Re: [ANN] Beta test of the W3C Markup Validator (0.8.0 beta 1)

From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2007 15:37:11 +0300
Message-Id: <BC4D9B70-3DD7-4370-A267-A0F68D6ED258@iki.fi>
Cc: "www-validator@w3.org Community" <www-validator@w3.org>
To: Sierk Bornemann <sierkb@gmx.de>

On Apr 25, 2007, at 13:10, Sierk Bornemann wrote:

> I *want* to use XHTML, lastly to promote it. I intentionally *want*  
> to use XHTML 1.1

Why?

> Browsers like the Internet Explorer, who don't work correctly, have  
> got a bad standing (espacially in my eyes), and I am *not* willing  
> to provide (or going further: foster) this bad standing any longer.

Does this mean you are going to serve application/xhtml+xml  
exclusively without any text/html concession to IE?
http://www.kafsemo.org/2007/02/26.html

> The browser vendor, especially Microsoft, *has to do* his homework  
> in delivering a good and reliable piece of software. If he doesn't,  
> it is his own fault, and the user should know, that there does  
> exist competition out there, which is far better to switch to.

How does the user know if you specifically expend effort to hide the  
IE issue from your readers?

> My solution in rewriting the MIME type by the webserver, if it  
> makes sense, is a compromise to not let the Internet Explorer out  
> of the playground.

How does that relate to "I am *not* willing to provide (or going  
further: foster) this bad standing any longer"?

-- 
Henri Sivonen
hsivonen@iki.fi
http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Sunday, 29 April 2007 12:37:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 25 April 2012 12:14:24 GMT