Re: Who is Gee Maçon ?

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 22:08:36 +1000, in sci.electronics.design Al
Borowski <al.borowski@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>
>>>>The document located at <http://www.guymacon.com/> was checked and
>>>>found to be valid XHTML 1.0 Strict.
>>>>
>>>>Not many websites can claim this
>>>
>>>Because as long as web sites view in popular browsers, no one cares.
>>
>>
>> Leaving aside the fact that you are wrong about valid pages not being
>> needed for "popular browsers" (do a web search on [ quirks mode ] ),
>> it's a matter of professional pride. I don't ship buggy code or buggy
>> hardware, so why would I put up buggy webpages?
>
>I know about quirks mode. The point is, as long as the page correctly
>renders on popular browsers, 99% of people simply don't care what what
>the validator says.
>
>Case in point: google.com
>
>http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fgoogle.com
>
>The validator says there are _52_ errors. Do I care? No. It renders
>properly on Firefox, Mozilla and IE.
>
>Al
But If you PAID someone to write a comprehensive website for your biz,
would you not expect it to be correctly validated?


martin
.

Quantcast