Re: an official W3C browser test

> Don't worry too much about backwards compatiability.  A browser
>that forced Web designers to code their pages *correctly* would be a good
>idea.  Programmers can't write code that includes features that were
>removed from the language they are using, why should this be different for
>HTML.

the new HTML as XML is very strict. XML is draconian in their enforcement of
correct coding techniques.

The browser makers though will probably build in a 'fudge' engine for files
sent with an HTML mime.


----- Original Message -----
From: Gordon Worley <redbird@orlando.crosswinds.net>
To: Inanis Brooke <alatus@earthlink.net>; www-html <www-html@w3.org>
Sent: Sunday, January 10, 1999 11:40 AM
Subject: Re: an official W3C browser test


>Inanis Brooke wrote:
>
>>The problem we'd face here is making sure that it's backward compatible
with
>>previous HTML versions... Now, a decision has to be made then as well:
would
>
> Don't worry too much about backwards compatiability.  A browser
>that forced Web designers to code their pages *correctly* would be a good
>idea.  Programmers can't write code that includes features that were
>removed from the language they are using, why should this be different for
>HTML.
>
>>the test suite test support for bad HTML code that runs rampant on the
'net,
>>or do we "force" webmasters out there to clean up their code? (I'm pretty
>
> Encouraging bad code would be a mistake.  The issue of backwards
>compatiability should be left up the the browser makers, as well as the
>issue of messy code.  Also, the messy code created by WYSISYG development
>tools needs to be curbed, making this an excellent oppertunity to do so.
>If browser makers find it easier to support the standard than messy code,
>hand coders like myself could become a hot commodity for six to twelve
>months.  Of course, the advancement of HTML development tools is tangent on
>the browser makers conformance.
>
>>done, and let them write in their OWN support for sloppy HTML (since I
think
>>they did that in the first place.
>
> The W3C is a standards body and should not be concerned with
>non-standard (or rather recomended in the case of HTML) versions of the
>standard.  Why should anything change now that we're trying to enforce the
>recomendations and standards?
>
>________________________________________
>Red Bird Island Productions
>Gordon Worley
>http://www.crosswinds.net/orlando/~redbird/
>mailto:redbird@orlando.crosswinds.net
>
>
>

Received on Sunday, 10 January 1999 14:28:06 UTC