On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 1:42 PM, Vincent [EMAIL-REMOVED]> wrote:
> 1) Â Â Â The third line here validates in CSS3 but not in CSS2.1 -
> a) does that matter?
Not really, since you're doing it intentionally, and you'd run into
that issue with anything that's valid in CSS3 but not in CSS2.1.
> I didn't really want to create a separate stylesheet for IE6 but maybe I
> should if I want validation. What would you do?
I usually end up making IE-version specific files & wrap them in
conditional comments. That way you don't need to rely on a hack to get
see you through. (Though I have to admit that I'll throw hacks in my
main CSS files during development, if I can, to keep things grouped
together for easier revision.)
> P.S. what really are the advantages of being compliant? I hear it's
> better for SEO and I like the idea, just from a professional pride POV
> but why be compliant. Do a couple of underscore hacks pose a problem?
Well-formed HTML can play a significant role in how your pages are
parsed & indexed by search engines (as well as some assistive
technologies), but CSS validation doesn't play a role in that way.
Validating your CSS helps to preempt real mistakes, etc. The validator
has saved me from a forgotten semicolon several more times than I'd
like to admit.
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/