<html><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">Hi Catherine and John,<div><br><div><div>On Jun 18, 2009, at 9:46 PM, catherine wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div>John Foliot - WATS.ca wrote:<br><blockquote type="cite">Robert J Burns wote:<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Is that a joke? I haven't been following this<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"> thread close enough.<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">From all appearances this is not a joke. I started a thread last week<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">asking about the real value in conformance vis-à-vis HTML5, and from that<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">thread came comments from Rob Sayre (I believe) that Henri’s “validator” was<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">in fact more of an ideology checker, as it appears that user agents<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">(browsers) will render non valid and valid content equally (this confirmed,<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">at least for Firefox, by Jonas Siking) – they do not throw critical errors<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">on non-valid code, thus striving for valid code is an ideological desire,<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">but one step removed from actual consequences. Ergo, let’s call a spade a<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">spade.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Somewhat surprised by the turn of events that have subsequently transpired,<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">but truth in advertising...<br></blockquote><br>Still, if this is not a joke, not sure this is a good thing (i.e. pretty sure it is not).<font class="Apple-style-span" color="#000000"><font class="Apple-style-span" color="#144FAE"><br></font></font></div></blockquote><br></div><div>Definitely not a good thing. It takes this a step further by belittling document conformance. It raises up the implementation conformance to the only thing that matters (except for “loyalty” or “ideology”, which in this context sounds only disparaging; not that there's anything wrong with loyalty and ideology normally, but that's not how those concepts are understood by WhatWG).</div><div><br></div><div>The current crop of browsers are just one set of browsers that got the way they are by reverse engineering horrible IE working parsing and presentation algorithms. I think this move is meant to raise up IE to an even higher level (which is all the WhatWG seem interested in doing). Document conforming documents will work in browsers that are not HTML5 implementation conforming (including possibly future documents that non-conforming HTML may break within and we shouldn't make promises about the future based on the views of some idiot like Ian Hickson and whomever he represents). Sorry, I'm really trying to stay away from this whole mess, but it keeps getting worse and worse doesn't it.</div><div><br></div><div>Take care,</div><div>Rob</div></div></body></html>