Posted by dorayme on 12/13/06 01:21

In article <m6eun21ncsjvnhm38ieku23tnt647of9g2@4ax.com>,
Spartanicus <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> Bergamot <bergamot@visi.com> wrote:
>
> >>>Try using zoom:1 instead of the height property. It's a proprietary MS
> >>>property
> >>
> >> The stylesheet won't be standards-compliant anymore.
> >
> >So what? Passing validation is a worthy goal, but is not the be-all and
> >end-all. There is nothing wrong with using proprietary properties if you
> >know what you are doing. That's not in the same category as exploiting
> >parsing errors, if that's what you're thinking.
>
> I'd go further, validation is only a tool that may be of some help to
> beginners to discover basic syntax errors. But there is no intrinsic
> value in CSS that "validates". Most competent developers never check
> their CSS with a syntax checker, ergo nothing is lost by their code not
> passing a dumb bot check.

Still, if one is using iCab and the little face (a brilliant
little invention of the browser maker) is not smiling, it would
be unlikely that the hardiest and experienced developer would not
want to click it and at least take a peek at what is causing such
unhappiness...

--
dorayme

[Back to original message]