From: "Antti Kurenniemi" 

I know it is in the standard, but that doesn't make it smart. Even a
standard can be a stupid one. IMO, of course. And no, I did not make any
comment about backwards compatibility, just about using comments to contain
information that is not ignoreable (is that a word?).


Antti Kurenniemi

"Rich"  wrote in message news:3f8e339a{at}w3.nls.net...
   Believe what you wish but this mechanism is codifiled in the HTML
standard.  Comments allow for constructs that are to be ignored by
implementations that don't support them.  If you think that backward
compatibility is stupid, so be it.

Rich

  "Antti Kurenniemi"  wrote in message
news:3f8e2d99$1{at}w3.nls.net...
  I don't agree with you on this one. Nothing inside a comment should make
any
  damn difference if it is altered or taken out, so using comments as
  conditional identifiers is not only wrong but also very stupid, and bound
to
  fail sooner or later.

  Antti Kurenniemi

  "Rich"  wrote in message news:3f8ddc7b$1{at}w3.nls.net...
     Replace "browser" with "HTML viewer".  It's HTML. 
It's expressed as a
  comment for backward compatibility.  The same has been used in the past
for
  other HTML constructs like script.

     None of this has anything to do with spam.  George made a bad
assumption
  and failed to test these.  He has only himself to blame.

  Rich

    "John Beamish"  wrote in message
  news:3f8dd908{at}w3.nls.net...
    Not a good example, Rich.

    The opening sentence on the page reads "One of the most common
operations
  performed in a Web page is to detect the browser type and version. "

    George was talking about using Word for an email editor.  Web pages and
  email/spammail are hardly likely to be overlapping sets.

      "Rich"  wrote in message news:3f8da505$1{at}w3.nls.net...
         These are not comments to be read.  These are conditional comments

(http://msdn.microsoft.com/workshop/author/dhtml/overview/ccomment_ovw.asp)
  and have meaning.

         You have only yourself to blame for deploying something you
obviously
  did not test.

      Rich

        "Geo."  wrote in message
  news:3f8d9f59$1{at}w3.nls.net...

        Well Microsoft to the rescue.. All the idiots who use Word 10 as
their
  email
        editor are now generating code with tons of comments like:

        
        
        
        
        
        
        
        
        

        I mean come on people, is anyone at Microsoft even thinking about
how
  this
        affects things, do they WANT more spam? What are you guys thinking,
  someone
        actually reads the SOURCE besides email admins trying to filter the
  crap?

        Geo.

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5