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 author). -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 -- Kynn Bartlett <kynn@reef.com> Technical Developer Liaison Reef North America Accessibility - W3C - Integrator Network Tel +1 949-567-7006 ________________________________________ BUSINESS IS DYNAMIC. TAKE CONTROL. ________________________________________ http://www.reef.comReceived 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