div#div# Another IE CSS Hack technique? — OZONE Asylum, home of the Mad Scientists

CSS - DOM - XHTML - XML - XSL - XSLT

div#div# Another IE CSS Hack technique?

This page's ID: 30572

Edit Post

Who can edit a post?	The poster and administrators may edit a post. The poster can only edit it for a short while after the initial post.

Your User Name:
Your Password:
Login Options:	Remember Me On This Computer

Your Text: Insert Slimies » Insert UBB Code » Close Last Tag \| All Tags UBB Help	[quote] [quote][b]HZR said:[/b] it has nothing to do with the prose, only the machine checkable part of the specification[/quote]To me this only supports my point - the W3C validator saying you're using valid code doesn't mean your code is valid, only that the code it is aware of is valid. Consider a more extreme case of hiding non-standard code usage in JavaScript.[/quote] It certainly does not support your point, because you're confused about what validation means. A validator checks a document instance against a set of formal rules expressed in the machine-processable part of the DTD. If the instance conforms to those rules, it's valid. The spec could say that the document must use "Hello World" as the title, but there is no way for a DTD-based validator to check this. If you had another title the document would be non-conformant, but still valid. [quote] [quote][b]HZR said:[/b] about XML/SGML and what a comment is[/quote]If HTML were SGML, we'd call it SGML. HTML has additional rules on top of SGML.[/quote] It actually has, and this effectively disqualifies HTML from being an SGML application. That's of couse pre-HTML 5 where they stopped pretending. [quote] [quote][b]HZR said:[/b] explain what that would have anything to do with validitity[/quote]Explain how usage of something forbidden by a spec has to do with conformance with the spec?[/quote] Conformance and validity are not the same thing. reisio, read what [b]liorean[/b] said about how a UA interpreting something one way or another does not make it non-conformant. Do you believe that the CC syntax was valid before IE started to assign special meaning to it, and that is suddenly stopped being valid when they did? Another example: browsers sniff the doctype declaration. Does that mean that a doctype is invalid as it's not used the way the spec describes? [small](Edited by [url=http://www.ozoneasylum.com/user/2269]HZR[/url] on 10-23-2008 13:29)[/small] Loading...
Options:	Enable Slimies Enable Linkwords

« Backwards — Onwards »

Show Forum Drop Down Menu