• To: "'Ann Navarro'" <ann@w...>,"'Thomas B. Passin'" <tpassin@c...>,<xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: W3C XFrames - first public WD published
• From: "bryan" <bry@i...>
• Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2002 12:03:36 +0200
• Importance: Normal
• In-reply-to: <4.3.2.7.2.20020807090700.02465220@m...>

Ann Navarro said 
>Do you have anything more specific on that? Using XHTML 1.0 *anything* 
>that's valid shouldn't produce any glaring problems in any of the major

>browsers more recent versions. (circa 1999 forward)

For development purposes there is another side to that which I don't
think is matched, that is to say using XHTML 1.0 that's invalid should
product glaring problems of a similar nature in major browsers of more
recent versions, the same for CSS 1. 
If something that's wrong doesn't produce glaring problems of a similar
nature then it is very difficult to debug what is actually wrong.

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: W3C XFrames - first public WD published
    • From: Ann Navarro <ann@w...>

• References:
  • Re: W3C XFrames - first public WD published
    • From: Ann Navarro <ann@w...>

• Prev by Date: RE: matching text with regexp in xpath
• Next by Date: RE: Iceberg development (was Re: maps)
• Previous by thread: Re: W3C XFrames - first public WD published
• Next by thread: RE: W3C XFrames - first public WD published
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread