Off topic: IE7 was Re: [sdiy] Digital noise source project (replacing MN5837 in Prophet 5and Monopoly)

[Samppa Tolvanen]

On 5/24/08, Donald Tillman <don at till.com> wrote:
>    > Date: Sat, 24 May 2008 16:22:15 +0300
>    > From: "Samppa Tolvanen" <samppa.tolvanen at gmail.com>
>
>    >
>    > Still I hail for Rainers strict standard compliance message.
>    >
>    > Don: "Workaround", "Good Enough" - Is this the message You want
>    > to give?  "In the Real World we rather code JS browser detection
>    > and hacks rather than doing w3c compliant pages"?
>
>
> Please don't misquote me, I never said any of that.  That's very much
>  the opposite of my message.
>
Please.

>  My point was that being W3C compliant is important, but it's not
>  enough because the browsers people use don't always implement W3C
>  correctly.  Which is exactly what started this discussion.
>
Can I ask You, Which was the browser Your not mentioning here?
>
>  So you need to be W3C compliant *and* you need to adjust the style
>  sheet so that the page displays acceptably in all likely browsers.
>
No - You do w3c compliant pages. Period.

>  Side note:
>  The W3C offers a very nice validation service:
>   http://validator.w3.org
>
Yes - Looks like "My Browser" has that on drop down menu. Damn.

Samppa