Sorry for the confusion, but I'm not the same guy who sells hot tubs.
In my original post, you will notice that I refered first to the way the pages actually tested in the different browsers. Then I suggested using websitegarage.com to solve some of the problems with a page that was not working well in all of the tests. This HTML validator will catch almost all of the problems. I suggested using the W3C validator after using websitegarage.com, to hold your pages to a higher standard.
>Then think, if you really did care about your viewers - you would do
>your best to make your site work on ALL platforms, even if that
>requires checking what browser the viewer is using and
>dynamically modifying your code to compensate for browser
>incompatibilities, not just blindly following a standard because it is
I agree, and this is exactly what I do. My pages are tested on version three and above browsers on Windows 95, 98, and NT as well as Macintosh and Linux. I also have a text only version of my site. All of the pages I design fit the W3C standard and look good in the browsers. I'm not saying that a perfectly good looking page on all browsers and platforms is only one that fits the standard. For example, all of the major browsers will work with or without the doctype declaration on the first line of the page. The point is that none of us would have to test all of these different systems. If all you have is a single box running Windows, you can't. Until we get the browser that you would "wholeheartedly support" we should design our pages to meet a W3C standard, and test them on all the systems that we can. We should NOT use proprietary tags which W3C rejected. That's what I'm trying to say.
>As an aside to this message, if we all blindly followed the standards,
>then all the webpages in the world would still have grey backgrounds
>and no graphics.
>It took innovation (from these big companies that are trying to SCREW
>you) to get the internet where it is today. I think you should
>actually thank them for the time and effort they have
>invested to enable you to be in business on the Internet today.
Don't take it personally, but you're wrong. These companies all regularly submit their innovations to W3C. If the innovation is the best solution that exists at the time for a particular problem, it gets approved as the W3C standard. The problems come when W3C decides that another company had a better idea, and instead of producing products which use the standard (which anyone is free to do, even if another company came up with the idea) they try to crush the better innovation in the marketplace by leveraging their size and big budget campaigns with sexy ads. That's what people use to decide which product to buy. They aren't experts. If you can't become an expert on a subject, you need to find someone who is an expert that you can trust to look out for your best interests. In this case, that is W3C.