[6463] in im locker bugs
XHTML is much better than HTML, yes, but you have to tell people why, in a compelling manner.
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Drake Mark)
Tue Jun 12 15:58:47 2007
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 16:59:04 -0300
From: Drake Mark <irrs@russlyon.com>
To: bug-im@mit.edu
News Hits! New R&D Facility Engaged!
Chan-On International Inc.
Symbol: CAON
Close: $0.73
News hits today on CAON and trading continues to warm up. Hitting highs
of $0.90 today, we can see this building. Read the release and get on
CAON first thing Tuesday. We can see this climbing all week!
It's clear to me that HTML standardization does more good than harm, but
I don't pretend that the HTML design is a thing of beauty.
Those who yearn to speak a language beautiful in its logic should not
speak English. Is there nothing you can do?
Comments failing these requirements and spam will not get published;
others will appear on the entry page after review by the staff. HTML
interoperability is a black art; the specification is only a small part
of what you need to know to build interoperable tools.
I had not noticed this little bug.
Preferably, the Working Group SHOULD be able to demonstrate two
interoperable implementations of each feature. According to the Web
Architecture document, orthogonal specifications are a good thing.
org web site, and to be responsive in spirit as well as in letter to
public comments.
Comments failing these requirements and spam will not get published;
others will appear on the entry page after review by the staff. For
these checks, the validator issues warnings. I don't know whether
there's any point to basing a standard on IE's approach to embedding XML
in HTML, but maybe there is.
