RE: Authors describing what their URIs mean

>I don't think I agree with Seth's argument here - ignoring a spec is a 
>approach, whether or not the majority of browsers will accept it is

Well, when the XHTML validator tells me the page is incorrect because
there is no such attribute as "xmlns:rdf" for the "rdf:RDF" element
type, this tells me that there is something extremely na´ve about that
validator -- not that there is something wrong with my page.  If my page
is perfectly well-formed XML and renders in > 90% of browsers available
today, that seems like it is doing much better than what XHTML1.0 can
claim to do.  This is something I opined about at$78?mode=day.

Received on Sunday, 15 April 2001 02:58:35 UTC