Posted by Chaddy2222 on 09/20/07 13:53

On Sep 20, 10:56 pm, Bergamot <berga...@visi.com> wrote:
> Peter J Ross wrote:
> > In alt.html on Thu, 20 Sep 2007 12:02:31 GMT, Beauregard T. Shagnasty
> > <a.nony.m...@example.invalid> wrote:
>
> >> entering the URL, the validator says:
> >> "This Page Is Valid HTML 4.01 Strict!"
>
> > Different content is being served to different browsers, according to
> > what Accept: header is sent.
>
> Why do people bother doing this for what is obviously plain HTML? There
> is no benefit whatsoever that I can see. In fact, it is problematic when
> you consider caching servers.
>
> > The validator chooses the HTML version,
>
> Which is all anyone else needs, at least for the OP's site.
>
Hmmm I would blame the CMS writers / coders myself. They can at times
make it quite hard to change the code that gets output to the UA.
Which means you end up with a complete tag soop type system.
--
Regards Chad. http://freewebdesign.awardspace.biz

• Next in forum: Re: positioning content inside iframe
• Prev in forum: Re: Flickr Kook Has Been Caught!
• Thread view: Re: what do you think? review my site.... is it working in your browser

[Reply to this message]