[thelist] Re: WebReview responds to WaSP browser death march

[aardvark]

> From: "Sabrina Dent, Apperception" 
<sabrina.dent at appercept.co.uk>
> 
> > i think we need a "to hell with bad WYSIWYGs" campaign...
> > nobody who uses a WYSIWYG editor is going to change...
> 
> Jesus, generalise a little more, why don't you? That is just *so*
> rude. <shakes head in dismay>

well, while the statement may not be qualified correctly, it is still 
accurate... those who use WYSIWYGs *exclusively* (which is the 
missing qualifier) are still going to churn out non-compliant code...

those users *can't* change as they are at the whim of a tool that 
won't write correct code...

now, if you're dismayed because you think WYSIWYGs put out 
correct code, that's one thing (and not correct, unless you can 
show me one that does spit out validating code for an average 
page)...

but if you're dismayed because you think i was talking about those 
who use one and hand code as well, i've qualified it... i often forget 
to do that when writing late at night, it happens... but with the 
qualifier, i stand by it...

it's kind of hard to respond to this, however, if you don't tell me 
*why* you're dismayed...  can i assume you use a WYSIWYG?  if 
so, do you use it exclusively?  no hand-coding?  if so, then, not 
much i can say, except the tool holds you back... if you are hand-
tweaking the code, good for you, but you might want to consider 
the limitations of the tool...