: Re: browsing vs validation, or, why not to make software robust

Charles Henrich <henrich@crh.cl.msu.edu>

Mail folder: WWW Talk Jul-Oct 1993
Next message: Marc Andreessen: "icon request"
Previous message: Marc Andreessen: "Re: browsing vs validation, or, why not to make software robust"

From: Charles Henrich <henrich@crh.cl.msu.edu>
Message-id: <9308190004.AA10203@crh.cl.msu.edu>
Subject: : Re: browsing vs validation, or, why not to make software robust
To: www-talk@nxoc01.cern.ch
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1993 20:04:27 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21]
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 902       
Status: RO

Really a browser should handle "bad" html in any way the author see's fit.
Garbage In, Garbage Out No?  As long as a browser can parse, and properly
display valid HTML (HTML+) the browser does as it should, and there should be
no complaints.  In fact browsers that dont barf and dump core on bad HTML is a
good thing!  Why should Mosaic (or any browser) inform users of bad HTML?  As
someone who is using the web (not creating documents) I dont want to see error
messages when the browser is parsing "bad" html.  I dont care.  The author is
the one responsible for good HTML, and as such should have tools such as an
html-lint available to them.  However, "lint" inside a HTML browser is
uneccesary, and from a user point of view, unwanted.

-Crh

    Charles Henrich     Michigan State University     henrich@crh.cl.msu.edu

    http://rs560.msu.edu:82/afsmsu/user/h/e/henrich/public/web/henrich.html