- From: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>
- Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2002 11:53:52 -0800
- To: "David Woolley" <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
At 2:12 PM +0000 1/6/02, David Woolley wrote: >From: "Chris Croome" <chris@webarchitects.co.uk> > >> The last version of Bobby came up with loads of 'browser compability' >> errors when one was using XHTML rather than HTML, most of these seem to > >Unless you write downwards compatible XHTML, you should expect >compatibility errors. And even then you should still expect it, because Bobby "browser compatability" errors are really more like warnings, which say things like "this browser doesn't support <X> or <Y>". In some cases that's completely harmless, in others it's serious. In many cases you may want to just completely forget about warnings; for example, it's very possible (unless they've changed it recently) to generate a self- contradictory Bobby report. Like what? Well, things like one part of the report saying "you need to add the <acronym> element" and then once you've added it, a warning saying the <acronym> element is not supported by browsers X, Y, and Z. (I suspect David knows this already; I'm mainly making the point for the general audience.) --Kynn -- Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com> http://kynn.com Chief Technologist, Idyll Mountain http://idyllmtn.com Web Accessibility Expert-for-hire http://kynn.com/resume January Web Accessibility eCourse http://kynn.com/+d201 Forthcoming: Teach Yourself CSS in 24 Hours
Received on Sunday, 6 January 2002 14:58:31 UTC