- From: Michael Adams <linux_mike@paradise.net.nz>
- Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 21:56:40 +1200
- To: www-validator@w3.org
On Mon, 15 May 2006 08:25:15 +0900 olivier Thereaux wrote: <snip> > Let us not, therefore, be too hasty in equating the statement from one > participant in a mailing-list to the stance of W3C at large: Jukka, in > the present case, is an active participant to this mailing-list, and > has a lot of insight, but his message does not represent the official > message of W3C. So, please read his "Comments considered harmful" as > "some people, myself included, consider comments harmful", not "it has > been formally decided that comments were harmful and that their > support would be deprecated". > > Hoping this will help you understand the mechanics of W3C, > regards, > olivier I like that reply, Normally i like to defer to Jukka especially on the Valid HTML icon. But in this case i feel that there is a case for Comments. Yeah, ok, they may add to a page but it would take a lot of comments to even equal the overhead of one spacer GIF. On a scale of no-no's this is a minnow compared to the Moby Dick-ensian mess put out by Word or Frontpage. -- Michael Those that can, do; those that can't, teach.
Received on Monday, 15 May 2006 09:55:47 UTC