Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.php > #17904
| Path | csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail |
|---|---|
| From | Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.php |
| Subject | Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? |
| Date | Fri, 26 Apr 2019 12:08:11 +0200 |
| Lines | 35 |
| Message-ID | <gig3kcFcejcU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink) |
| References | <f00fdd04-e13e-4aa8-98a6-43b8cdbbd996@googlegroups.com> <gid3upFn22bU1@mid.individual.net> <q9rq6e$rf6$2@gioia.aioe.org> <gidbbdFoj8aU1@mid.individual.net> <q9s0vd$1og2$1@gioia.aioe.org> <fohwE.105820$nx7.43783@fx28.iad> <q9ugvq$dbp$1@gioia.aioe.org> <gig0g2FbnrdU1@mid.individual.net> <q9ukrd$ukv$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| Mime-Version | 1.0 |
| Content-Type | text/plain; charset=utf-8 |
| Content-Transfer-Encoding | 7bit |
| X-Trace | individual.net T2zPxxzSsRQNiHkH0sqlAg5BsV8bvsvGUmPK3tGWQdTvAcJuPC |
| Cancel-Lock | sha1:cqNnLdkEXl6fwK5nRUEigOKagUk= |
| In-Reply-To | <q9ukrd$ukv$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| Content-Language | en-US |
| Xref | csiph.com comp.lang.php:17904 |
Show key headers only | View raw
On 26.04.19 11:59, R.Wieser wrote: > Arno, > >> The problem is, browsers *must* support most obselete >> code as well, otherwise many older websites wouldn't work >> at all. > > Bullcrap. > > Yes, your conclusion is right, those websites would not work anymore. But > I fail to see how that would be a problem. It could even be beneficial, > as it would get rid of alot of non-maintained websites that way. The problem is that people like you come to the wrong conclusion that obselete code is still fine to use and there is no reason at all to use newer techniques for new websites. > Odd though: The OP /must/ write perfect HTML, even though there is no need > for that as all browsers still support non-perfection too. To me that > sounds like a waste of time and money ... No, there is need for this. Because you can not make sure, that *all* browsers including *future* version will support the invalid code the same way. But I guess, doing constant compatibility testing with all new browser versions to make sure that invalid HTML will be displayed as intended is not a waste of time and money for you. Did you ever do a website or a web based application professionally? -- Arno Welzel https://arnowelzel.de
Back to comp.lang.php | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? Dan Campbell <dcwhatthe@gmail.com> - 2019-04-24 07:30 -0700
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-04-25 08:55 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-04-25 10:12 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-04-25 11:01 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-04-25 12:08 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-04-25 13:59 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-04-25 16:13 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-04-25 16:56 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2019-04-25 08:05 -0400
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-04-26 10:53 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-04-26 11:14 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-04-26 11:59 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-04-26 12:08 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2019-05-29 19:20 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-04-25 09:49 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-04-25 11:06 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-04-25 14:09 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? Dan Campbell <dcwhatthe@gmail.com> - 2019-04-25 05:32 -0700
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-04-26 11:20 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-04-26 11:31 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-04-26 11:09 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-04-26 11:20 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-04-26 11:24 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-04-26 12:31 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-04-26 13:34 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-04-26 13:36 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? "J.O. Aho" <user@example.net> - 2019-04-25 21:36 +0200
csiph-web