(10:15:36) me: apopos of nothing, Mozilla will no longer DWIM with CSS ids that start with numbers (10:15:52) him: dwim? (10:15:55) me: as in #2003-foo-bar, rather than #img-2003-foo-bar (10:16:00) me: Do What I Mean (10:16:22) him: it's invalid (10:16:33) me: Mozilla is in fact honouring the spec, where it used to just silently ignore the error and render the CSS (10:16:40) him: oh cool (10:16:54) him: where is that news? (10:16:58) me: cool for you, maybe - I have a bunch of posts to fix (10:17:22) me: I don't know - I just figured it out when I noticed that some images on aaronland weren't rendering (10:17:29) him: hehe (10:17:31) him: :D (10:17:49) him: one proof that it's benefitial to follow the Web standards. (10:18:07) him: You have more chances than someone one day decide to respect the standard ;) (10:18:20) me: yeah yeah yeah (10:18:35) me: this is where we get in to the part of the W3C docs sucking (10:19:09) me: and you tell me "but they are written for people writing applications not documents" (10:19:25) him: I didn't say anything :)
(10:15:52) him: dwim?
(10:15:55) me: as in #2003-foo-bar, rather than #img-2003-foo-bar
(10:16:00) me: Do What I Mean
(10:16:22) him: it's invalid
(10:16:33) me: Mozilla is in fact honouring the spec, where it used to just silently ignore the error and render the CSS
(10:16:40) him: oh cool
(10:16:54) him: where is that news?
(10:16:58) me: cool for you, maybe - I have a bunch of posts to fix
(10:17:22) me: I don't know - I just figured it out when I noticed that some images on aaronland weren't rendering
(10:17:29) him: hehe
(10:17:31) him: :D
(10:17:49) him: one proof that it's benefitial to follow the Web standards.
(10:18:07) him: You have more chances than someone one day decide to respect the standard ;)
(10:18:20) me: yeah yeah yeah
(10:18:35) me: this is where we get in to the part of the W3C docs sucking
(10:19:09) me: and you tell me "but they are written for people writing applications not documents"
(10:19:25) him: I didn't say anything :)