- From: Vadim Plessky <lucy-ples@mtu-net.ru>
- Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 13:50:34 +0400
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Friday 16 August 2002 12:21 pm, Ian Hickson wrote: | On Fri, 16 Aug 2002, Vadim Plessky wrote: | > Jan Roland's code is Valid HTML and Valid CSS, you can't call this | > wrong! | | http://ln.hixie.ch/?start=1022362838&count=1 <quote Ian Hickson> Well, sorry, but writing a Web page using only <span>s and <div>s, using tables for layout in a document labelled as being HTML 4.01 Strict, sending XML files as text/html or CSS files as text/plain, saying width:100% when you mean width:auto, giving alt attributes that contain titles instead of alternate text... that isn't standards compliant. Those violations might not be caught by the imperfect and limited validators that the W3C provides, but they are just as bad if not worse than the simple technical errors that are caught by these automated verification tools. </quote Ian Kickson> Well, I understand that this is your *private* opinion, and you, as every human being, have a right for own opinion. But I naturally disagree with your opinion quaoted above. In particular, 1) writing a Web page using only <span>s and <div>s what's wrong with that? 2) using tables for layout --> here I agree. Thoughs different peole have differnet opiniuons what is *layout* and what is *structure* 3) document labelled as being HTML 4.01 Strict what's wrong with this? It's much better than <html> without DTD. Of course XHTML is better, but HTML 4.01-Strict is *good enough* for most applications. 4) saying width:100% when you mean width:auto How do you *know* what people *mean*? Do you have CrystalBall? Using 'width:auto' when you need div taking all width, is stupid, STUPID approach! 5) "Those violations might not be caught by the imperfect and limited validators that the W3C provides, but they are just as bad if not worse than the simple technical errors that are caught by these automated verification tools." So, *good guys* wrote _perfect_ W3C specification, and there are *bad guys* using it in a wrong way? Are you SERIOUS saying this? If W3C designed bad specification, or offers bad validation tools- that's the problem of W3C, not of web authors! -- Vadim Plessky http://kde2.newmail.ru (English) 33 Window Decorations and 6 Widget Styles for KDE http://kde2.newmail.ru/kde_themes.html KDE mini-Themes http://kde2.newmail.ru/themes/
Received on Friday, 16 August 2002 05:44:20 UTC