On 18/11/14 04:47, songbird wrote: > berenger.mo...@neutralite.org wrote: > ... >> PS: when I think about how crappy all of this is, and that I remember >> that many people said me that websites runs in the same way everywhere, >> I just laugh. I try to remember it everyday, since there is a rumor >> which says that laughing 5min per day is good for health, hehe > > :) thanks! and thanks to everyone else too. > > uhg! > > i've avoided this question for a while so far, > for good reasons and i can see they still apply.
Some will advice that validation is not important. And they're right - if accessibility is not important. (if it won't validate it probably won't render - and hence limit the audience). > > i'll send a note to the problem website support > desk and see if any thing will happen. Please do - I'm sure somewhere there is a developer who will thank you for agreeing with the advice they gave management - which was subsequently ignored. > since i > do have free time here or there i'll also volunteer > to help them test newer versions. You might also try spoofing a different user-agent to see if the site renders properly then. e.g.:- Chris Pederick's "User Agent Switcher" Firefox/Iceweasel extension. Note that HTML5 has only very recently become a standard, and that many websites that use "HTML5" don't conform with that standard. Perhaps if you posted the relevant URL we could offer more useful advice. Apologies if this advice has been repeated elswhere by those who "can't be bothered/don't know how to" *not* break threads (sigh) I caught "GoLinux's" post but may have missed others. > > > songbird > > Kind regards -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/546c5cda.5060...@gmail.com
