atw: Re: OT: Explorer and Firefox

Ryan:
On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 11:59:01 +1100,  you wrote:
>
> I'm not sure how Firefox is cheaper, since it needs to
> be downloaded in addition to a Windows installation,
> and standards compliance in the greater WWW is almost
> irrelevant as many sites write to be compatible with
> IE rather than the W3C standards. 

You wouldn't be saying that if you had had to do any 
extensive document conversion work (HTML to something or 
other else).   For example, loading web information into 
another tool for processing.

Let me assure you that the standards are very useful and 
most important in that they provide a known basis for 
parsing material from one format into another (which has 
been the point of XML adoption).

Microsoft has avowed itself as supportive of the XML 
development and standard, but has never bothered to fix up 
Explorer and other tools to ensure compatibility between or 
amongst various tools.

Some people think that's deliberate.   Others think it's a 
sign that while paying lip service, they won't pay money to 
fix their mistakes.

After all, XML now has a standard for HTML-type operations. 


--Peter M



**************************************************
To post a message to austechwriter, send the message to 
austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

To subscribe to austechwriter, send a message to 
austechwriter-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with "subscribe" in the Subject field.

To unsubscribe, send a message to austechwriter-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 
"unsubscribe" in the Subject field.

To search the austechwriter archives, go to 
www.freelists.org/archives/austechwriter

To contact the list administrator, send a message to 
austechwriter-admins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
**************************************************

Other related posts: