W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > June 2008

Re: Missing attribute in a <script> element (Was: Re: [VE][127] Add Subject Here)

From: Sierk Bornemann <sierkb@gmx.de>
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 15:58:01 +0200
Cc: www-validator@w3.org
Message-Id: <9150DACC-712D-475A-97CD-9B8E5EE7BC1E@gmx.de>
To: David Dorward <david@dorward.me.uk>


Am 13.06.2008 um 15:31 schrieb David Dorward:

> On 13 Jun 2008, at 14:24, Sierk Bornemann wrote:
>> They will be updated and upgraded to modern ones, when the owners  
>> and users observe, that they are bad positioned using them.
>
> Nice theory, in practise they will blame the site, not their browser  
> (which many users can't upgrade anyway) and go to a one of my rivals  
> instead.

Not, if you find some declaring words, that if the user would use  
aonother brother, the experience of surfing your site would be a  
little more brighter and better than surfing it with IE. :-)
No webstandard which has ever been published by the W3C or other  
standards bodies, demands, that web content has to be pixel-true  
beyond browsers. Accessibility has to be assured, yes. But nobody  
hinders you as a website owner to make your site so, that all major  
browsers do have access to it, but only the modern and widely  
webstandards-capable browers are able to give the user the full  
experience and the full glance and shining achivable with modern  
webstandards and a browser which is capable of them. If you use the IE  
on such a website, then you can access all relevant information. And  
you see it, let's say, on a medium level of optical and haptical  
experience. But not more. And if you use a modern webbrowser, than you  
can access the same content on a higher level with brighter shining,  
with more fun. The whole mechanism of the WWW does play to these  
rules, and they are literally defined in that direction in the W3C  
Specs: scaling. Why so long bowing down and make exceptions to these  
rules to one product of mainly one particular browser vendor?
Analogue in real life: if you use the freeway, than all vehicels using  
that also have to play to all the same rules, you even have to have a  
minimum speed to use it. Vehicles, not able to reach this minimum  
speed, are not permitted to use this freeway. Above this minimum speed  
all vehicles are allowed, no exception for one particular vehicle.
Back to the topic: so why lowering *all* rules and all needs to one  
particular vendor, when choice for e better product is there and  
choice is reasonable for the customer and user?

In practise, no user, no custumer will blame your site, if you  
*explain* him, that he would de better, if he would use another, a  
better product and that he would furthermore eventually save time and  
money, if he would be more open for products that do their job better.
If you avoid this interaction with the user/customer, than you change  
nothing. Then you addict to the status quo. Then you have to wait,  
until the problems might get fixed by this particular vendor somewhere  
in the future (if ever).


Sierk

-- 
Sierk Bornemann
email:            sierkb@gmx.de
WWW:              http://sierkbornemann.de/
Received on Friday, 13 June 2008 14:05:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 25 April 2012 12:14:29 GMT