- From: Andrew McFarland <andrew.mcfarland@unite.net>
- Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2002 09:21:40 +0000
- To: <www-html@w3.org>
At 21:59 23/02/2002 -0500, Jelks Cabaniss wrote: <snip/> >This is 2002 (not 1994), which makes one wonder whether this whole thing >isn't just a giant parody of hypocrisy (at best)... In any organization with more than one person there will be different opinions. Almost certainly, all the W3 member organizations have people who go for HTML that `works' rather than HTML that is valid. It just takes one of them to have the influence to add improperly nested elements or invalid attributes and the homepage isn't valid any more. It sucks, but its life. Attempting to reach W3 standards is still a good idea though. If you aim for perfection, 90% is still pretty good. Andrew -- Andrew McFarland UNITE Solutions http://www.unite.net/
Received on Monday, 25 February 2002 04:23:10 UTC