Sent by Dave Silvester on 15 September 2004 16:04
On Wednesday 15 Sep 2004 14:20, Al Sparber wrote:
> removing it might mean that you are placing more importance on having
> a W3C "badge" at the bottom of your page than you are on practicality.
Well, I'm not doing it to get any badges - in fact, as yet, none of my sites
have those, although I think I will include them on my personal site when
I've finished updating it. (Whenever that might be... bah, it's impossible
to find time to work on ones own website - mine has been approaching
completion for a few months now and it's still not finished!)
Anyway, back to my IE fixing: I think it makes sense from a practical point
of view. I know browsers ignore invalid CSS rules, but personally I'd rather
not go there because I can have it both ways. I prefer to keep my ugly fixes
out of the way of decent law-abiding browsers, because there is no reason to
expose them to the junk food that I have to feed IE.
Ultimately, it's all a matter of personal taste, but I like my solution
because it means I have 100% valid code, non-standards hacks out of the way
of good browsers, and can easily test multiple IE versions simultaneously
without messing with the registry each time, so it's win-win all round and
not really at the expense of any practicality. (Short of not caring if stuff
validates, but that is something I don't scrimp on these days. I support web
standards, so I make sure I adhere to them in my coding.)
~Dave
--
Dave Silvester
Music Technology Junkie
Web: http://www.mu-sly.co.uk/
Email: sly at mu hyphen sly dot co dot uk
______________________________________________________________________
css-discuss [EMAIL-REMOVED]]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
