Because I'm bored: EvilML
A few weeks ago, in a flash of boredom, I decided to create a rather “evil” html document. Why evil? Because, to my knowledge, there isn’t a browser under the sun that creates a sensible rendition of this document.
The EvilML document can be found here, and, if you like, you can always check how the w3c validator handles EvilML. Yes, valid HTML 4.01 Strict.
If you look at the source, and you’re unfamiliar with SGML, I’m pretty sure you would assert the validator was on crack, but really, it isn’t.
If you want to see what the rendition should look like, you can always view the unobfuscated version
Comments
Comment from Lasse G. Dahl on 2004-02-17 08:50
Looks quite ok in Lynx ;-)
Comment from Asbjørn Ulsberg on 2004-02-17 16:46
This is partly why I think the transition from HTML to XHTML is an outrageously good idea. Not that you need to code bad HTML, but if you’re allowed to, someone sure as hell will.
Comment from Arve on 2004-02-18 01:49
No, Lasse, it doesn’t look OK in Lynx. It’s just broken in a way that happens to work better for this particular document.
Comment from liorean on 2004-03-09 03:04
I’m a little surprised that you didn’t use the optional opening tags, but it was interesting enough to see. I’ve experimented a little myself. Here’s a minimal valid HTML 4.01 document, containing the HTML, HEAD, TITLE, BODY and P tags…
… and it validates, too.
Comment from Arve on 2004-03-09 11:13
Liorean, I condensed your two postings into one, making the first post look as you intended.
The reason your initial comment failed, is that the comment cleaning is somewhat laxer when you use Textile formatting instead of xhtml.
The textile interface has just been upgraded to a slightly modified version of Brad Choate’s Textile 2. Brad keeps a brief tutorial here.
This discussion has been closed. No further comments may be added.