- From: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>
- Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 20:58:15 +0000
On Mon, 2006-12-18 at 12:28 -0800, Aankhen wrote: > On 12/18/06, Alexey Feldgendler <alexey at feldgendler.ru> wrote: > > Maybe the other way round? "Valid [X]HTML" on valid documents? > > That seems reasonable; if it were unobtrusive, most users would just > ignore it, but it'd be there for anyone who wanted to know. The problem with this is it doesn't provide as much of an incentive for people to fix their markup as the fear (which you just expressed) that users might be scared of their "corrupted" or "invalid" or "warning" HTML does. (Actually I suspect many users would ignore both sets of notices since they wouldn't know what they mean. It's the psychological effect on authors that's really crucial.) But it would still be better than nothing. -- Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
Received on Monday, 18 December 2006 12:58:15 UTC