- From: §ee†hing¹³ <Seething13@webtv.net>
- Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:14:55 -0400 (EDT)
- To: L.Wood@eim.surrey.ac.uk (Lloyd Wood)
- Cc: www-validator@w3.org
Webtv tech? Hahahahaha! Webtv doesn't HAVE techs, it's an ongoing joke to naturally assume that they employ well trained chimpanzees. As far as the webtv "editor" goes, that thing is useless, and anyone who's been on webtv for more than a year KNOWS it is useless. The ONLY way to get an even half-way DISPLAYABLE page out of it is to comment out all of the unreachable code webtv adds itself, and then TRY to build OVER it.....as far as validating goes.....NEVER EVER would a webtv "pagebuilder" page validate......not even on the simplist level of HTML 3.2 tag soup terms! The preferred ways for webtv webmasters to build websites is to either sign up for a host that has an online text editor, such as wtv-zone.com, tripod.com, or geocities.com does, OR, those webtv webmasters in the know have their OWN online filemanagers run on PERL. If anyone is truely interested in what a typical webtv PERL filemanager/editor looks and works like, I'd be happy to post a .txt file of one to the list. The webtv browser has nothing to do with how webtv webmasters write their HTML/XHTML coding, as it's in no way connected. We TYPE our coding by hand, usualy refering to the multitude of tutorials out on the net for our coding standards. This DOES cause a LOT of problems, since a LOT of the "tutorials" out there on the net are BAD ones, written by other people who don't know correct coding themselves. MOST webtv built websites are HTML 3.2 tag soup, because most webtver's use www.Draac.com to learn from, since most webtver's are introduced to HTML through our VERY USER FRIENDLY html enabled email signature feature (which just so happens to support and prefer HTML 3.2). Hope that clears up webtv related questions some! Regards, Seething http://www.seething13.com
Received on Friday, 17 August 2001 10:14:57 UTC