«

With neither quill nor qualm, Travis Newbury quothed:

> Neredbojias <> said:
> >> We simply see it differently.
>
> > No, I understand that...
>
> And I completely agree with every single one of your points.
>
> But, what is right or wrong is different for every website. Google
> would fail if it looked like gamespy.com, and visa versa.

-Design-wise, yes. But "creative" (-meaning "invalid") markup is wrong
in the absolute. Anyway, I think we pretty much agree although I've
become a bit more conservative over the years. (You should've seen some
of my first web pages, though. *cringe*)

--
Neredbojias
Contrary to popular belief, it is believable.

Neredbojias <> said:
> With neither quill nor qualm, Travis Newbury quothed:
>> And I completely agree with every single one of your points.
>> But, what is right or wrong is different for every website.
>> Google would fail if it looked like gamespy.com, and visa
>> versa.
> -Design-wise, yes. But "creative" (-meaning "invalid") markup
> is wrong in the absolute.

Yes, it should be marked up as correctly as possible. (For example
the dreaded <embed>)

> Anyway, I think we pretty much agree
> although I've become a bit more conservative over the years.
> (You should've seen some of my first web pages, though.
> *cringe*)

I remember telling people "Hey take a look at my new website, and
check out the marque and visitor counter...."

--
-=tn=-

With neither quill nor qualm, Travis Newbury quothed:

> I remember telling people "Hey take a look at my new website, and
> check out the marque and visitor counter...."

I actually learned javascript before I learned all but the most
rudimentary html (-It was sooo cooool!) and applied it "accordingly".
Some of my pages were nine-tenths js plus. Oh, it worked great...if you
had my set-up. Perhaps that's why I lean toward conservatism - to get
others to learn the basics first and well before venturing into even
more problem-causing domains.

--
Neredbojias
Contrary to popular belief, it is believable.