W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > July 2001

Re: Shaming compaines into improving their HTML

From: Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com>
Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 01:11:01 -0700
Message-Id: <a05100300b7803a3c9a50@[]>
To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Cc: jason r tibbetts <tibbettj@verdi.iisd.sra.com>, "'www-validator@w3.org'" <www-validator@w3.org>, William Sheppard <will@nicnames.co.uk>
At 1:16 AM +0200 2001/7/22, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote:
>"We need an unforgiving browser that adheres strictly to the letter of
>the XHTML law in order to move forward to the future" says J. David
>Eisenberg in his article "Forgiving Browsers considered harmful" which
>can be found at http://www.alistapart.com/stories/forgiving/ and I agree
>with him, as I've already pointed out in this thread. Of course you are
>right and the browser should be also educational, but it should fail
>instead of rewarding authors for bad markup.

It doesn't directly hurt the author who has written "bad markup", it
directly hurts the -user-, and as an advocate for the user I can't
justify that direct harm to a naive user (who likely has no choice
as to what he runs on his system) even if ultimately it may produce
a more usable web site (by the time complaints get back to the

-My- user experience has never been improved by discovering a site
was tested in IE and Netscape, but not in Opera; I don't want to spend
my time writing to the site admin, I want to use the site!

This is off-topic for validator list, though.


Kynn Bartlett <kynn@reef.com>
Technical Developer Liaison
Reef North America
Accessibility - W3C - Integrator Network
Tel +1 949-567-7006
Received on Sunday, 22 July 2001 04:17:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:58:22 UTC