<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.4-libertus1" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Wild, Wacky World of World Wide Web Standards</title>
	<link>/libertus/2006/01/01/web-standards/</link>
	<description>The languishing ex-blog of a bloke with a job</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 29 Aug 2008 04:05:51 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.4-libertus1</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: Libertus</title>
		<link>/libertus/2006/01/01/web-standards/#comment-6980</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Jan 2006 19:47:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>/libertus/2006/01/01/web-standards/#comment-6980</guid>
					<description>My semantic tags are an integral part of my content and to remove them would be to change the meaning, so you can't honestly expect me to think that's a good idea. They do not generate the links - you do. &lt;a href='?outreach=none' rel="nofollow"&gt;Switch them off&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href='#outreach' rel="nofollow"&gt;using the control panel&lt;/a&gt; if you don't believe me.

I think my tags explain what I mean far more that a hyperlink alone can. If I strip out the tags and just leave the link, what does it mean? A link is just a structural element with no semantic content, implied or otherwise.

There is a "grand plan" but it's not at all under my control whether it becomes a reality. I plan to write experimental Firefox plug-ins that understand my tags (especially is:money) but browsers are not my target audience - people are - and people don't all use Firefox. I must primarily work within what the web standards say I may do and should expect all browsers to support.

Thank goodness validators aren't standards, then! I'm glad you poked me for the failed validation - it made me reassess that what I was doing was acceptable. On the other hand, you'll note that nowhere on my site do I claim that anything will be valid to any standard. I'm a mad inventor prone to mistakes. I don't want to be seen to be a hypocrite without defense.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My semantic tags are an integral part of my content and to remove them would be to change the meaning, so you can&#8217;t honestly expect me to think that&#8217;s a good idea. They do not generate the links - you do. <a href='?outreach=none' rel="nofollow">Switch them off</a> <a href='#outreach' rel="nofollow">using the control panel</a> if you don&#8217;t believe me.</p>
<p>I think my tags explain what I mean far more that a hyperlink alone can. If I strip out the tags and just leave the link, what does it mean? A link is just a structural element with no semantic content, implied or otherwise.</p>
<p>There is a &#8220;grand plan&#8221; but it&#8217;s not at all under my control whether it becomes a reality. I plan to write experimental Firefox plug-ins that understand my tags (especially is:money) but browsers are not my target audience - people are - and people don&#8217;t all use Firefox. I must primarily work within what the web standards say I may do and should expect all browsers to support.</p>
<p>Thank goodness validators aren&#8217;t standards, then! I&#8217;m glad you poked me for the failed validation - it made me reassess that what I was doing was acceptable. On the other hand, you&#8217;ll note that nowhere on my site do I claim that anything will be valid to any standard. I&#8217;m a mad inventor prone to mistakes. I don&#8217;t want to be seen to be a hypocrite without defense.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Tim</title>
		<link>/libertus/2006/01/01/web-standards/#comment-6979</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Jan 2006 18:53:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>/libertus/2006/01/01/web-standards/#comment-6979</guid>
					<description>Your tags are designed to tell your scripts where/when and how to hyperlink bits of text, once they have done that, they are redundant so you are just bloating your code and chewing up bandwidth to no purpose by sending them out.

Unless you have some &#34;Grand Plan&#34; for browsers to all be reconfigured to do something with the tags?

And, no, you are right, there is no pleasing validators. :(</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Your tags are designed to tell your scripts where/when and how to hyperlink bits of text, once they have done that, they are redundant so you are just bloating your code and chewing up bandwidth to no purpose by sending them out.</p>
<p>Unless you have some &quot;Grand Plan&quot; for browsers to all be reconfigured to do something with the tags?</p>
<p>And, no, you are right, there is no pleasing validators. <img src='/libertus/wordpress/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_sad.gif' alt=':(' class='wp-smiley' />
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Libertus</title>
		<link>/libertus/2006/01/01/web-standards/#comment-6978</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Jan 2006 01:06:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>/libertus/2006/01/01/web-standards/#comment-6978</guid>
					<description>There's no pleasing the validators. I've added my XML namespace and even declared the content type to be 'application/xhtml+xml' but to no avail. The W3C validator rejects my namespace declaration as an invalid attribute!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There&#8217;s no pleasing the validators. I&#8217;ve added my XML namespace and even declared the content type to be &#8216;application/xhtml+xml&#8217; but to no avail. The W3C validator rejects my namespace declaration as an invalid attribute!
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
