On Fri, Mar 03, 2006 at 11:25:49AM +0100, Jutta Wrage wrote: > In all other plattforms there are only minor validation problems that > can be corrected easily without making a noticible difference. But as > far as I can see, none of the pages really was valid HTML strict http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=www.debian.org%2Fvote%2F2006%2Fplatforms%2Fajt seems to say mine's "Valid HTML 4.01 Strict!". If it is, Manoj should probably take credit for that -- I just took my text, added some <h2>'s, <h3>'s, <p>'s and some <b> tags, he added all the stylesheets. > and > none (or nearly none) uses semantic tags only, which would be better > for people who can "see" only the text content. I always tend to use <b> and <i> instead of <strong> and <em> because they're shorter to type and I've never seen any reason for them to be anything other than aliases, no matter how the page is presented. Cheers, aj
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature