Is Javascript bad? Is W3 validation important, or just cross-browser compatibility is? (was: Supermarket repackaging trick again)

[Jason Spiro]

2006/7/15, Michael Newman <michael.r.newman-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w at public.gmane.org>:
> Jason Spiro wrote:
> > But MS has a lot of $ and resources, and Live will get better in the
> > future.
> >
> > Hopefully they'll start respecting web standards better by then...
> Speaking of respecting web standards, compare:
> http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fsearch.msn.com
>
> to http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com
>
> Yahoo/Alltheweb fail to validate as well.
>
> Granted, live.com blows up even worse than Google. I just think it's
> interesting that they should go to the effort of doing MSN Search the
> correct way.

I wouldn't read much into it. I suppose different departments at MSFT
care about standards different amounts.

Is W3 validation important? Doesn't it only matter that a page looks
good in a variety of browsers?

Also, is there really a problem with creating web pages that require
Javascript for a good reason, like GNU's GPLv3 comment interface did?

-- 
Jason Spiro: computer consulting with a smile.
I also do computer training and spyware removal for homes and businesses.
Call or email for a FREE 5-minute consultation. Satisfaction guaranteed.
jasonspiro4-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w at public.gmane.org / 416-781-5938 / Skype ID: jasonspiro
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml