Posted by Neredbojias on 10/09/05 21:32

With neither quill nor qualm, Tony Cooper quothed:

> On Sat, 8 Oct 2005 23:26:00 -0700, Neredbojias
> <neredbojias@neredbojias.com> wrote:
>
> >With neither quill nor qualm, Tony Cooper quothed:
> >
> >> I probably won't hang around alt.html very long since the regulars
> >> here sneer at 4.01 and seem to get off on pointing and shouting at
> >> deprecated tags.
> >
> >Well, it's a lot of fun.
> >
> >> They don't seem to understand that some of us are
> >> quite happy to use the simplest solution and don't see the need to
> >> learn to operate a 20 ton crane to lift a matchbox.
> >
> >"If something's worth doing, it's worth doing right."
> >
> >- My mother, circa 1960
>
> No argument from me on that score, but what is "right"? If the intent
> is to put up a single page with a couple of images, is placing the
> text and the images with CSS instead of 4.01 more "right"?
>
> If the intent is to put up a page that will be viewed by a dozen
> people for a month and then taken down, does it make it less "right"
> for the source to contain a tag that works now but might not work in a
> year or so?

I'd say as long as it validates in the parts of the validator that
aren't broken themselves, you're flippin' the flapjacks proficiently

--
Neredbojias
Contrary to popular belief, it is believable.

[Back to original message]