[ENH]Html table (second version)

John Hinsley jhinsley at telinco.co.uk
Mon Aug 27 00:48:37 UTC 2001


"Noel J. Bergman" wrote:

> 
> John Hinsley's table example is very ill-formed.  

No it's not! It's -- as Ned points out -- absolutely valid and weblint
verified. If you want to argue that pre pseudo XML HTML is ill-formed,
you'll have one hell of a lot of valid sites to re-write! (Then you can
start on the genuinely ill-formed ones ;-) ).

Tidy is a nice tool. My main objections to it are that it balances tags
where they really don't need to be balanced -- unecessarily increasing
the length of documents is _always_ a bad thing -- and that it inserts
its own meta tag (see above, plus it's rather rude).

What I like about HTML is that I can read a page written to the earliest
standards in the latest browsers. (Scamper excepted!) If someone sends
me a Word 2000 .doc as an email attachment I can always reply and tell
them to send it in another format (if I'm feeling particularly awkward,
I'll ask for it as dvi). Were my browser to refuse to read HTML to
earlier standards, I'd be buggered. (Seems to me that this may be
exactly what Microsoft want.)

(Incidentally, I know of at least one post-grad course where people are
still taught to hand craft 3.2 HTML with vi -- I was accused of cheating
because I found a copy of gvim -- built against Motif -- yuk! -- on one
of the servers and thus had the advantage of coloured syntax
highlighting.)

But as I'm not in a position to do any work on it, I wouldn't want to
enter into any argument about what course Scamper's development should
follow. Follow your heart, Karl: by doing the work, you've earned that
right!

Cheers

John



-- 
Can't cope anymore? Desperate for help?
Join the 12 step program for those who yearn to give up Microsoft:
http://home.earthlink.net/~penguinrox/index.html




More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list