mastertech said:When...presented with facts that go against...established beliefs...I have noticed...even openly admit to being unable to stop something as elementary as Malware infection...hardly reputable...to dispute anything!
mastertech said:Regardless don't be manipulated...and...demand...a single argument that refutes a single fact on this page...The sources speak for themselves and the facts are irrefutable
PostPosted: Fri Feb 11, 2005 8:24 pm
You really dont get it do you?? WTF does someone have to say to you to get you to go to your corner and piss your pants????? Good lord...you are NOT the savior you think you are..if people choose to use FF..so be it..i use both..does that make me a bad person? Pffffffffffffft... i was willing to give you a chance..but at every post you seem to get more into yourself...and refuse to see other peoples opinons...i really dont give a rats a** how old ..or how much supposed knowledge you pretend to have...for christ sake ...GROW UP..or is that beyond your comprehension??? If you decide to come back with some smart ...silly ...remark..then you really are a troll..so use your head for a change..most goats do
The article you have just come from states that Internet Explorer has better support for the XHTML 1.1 changes than Firefox. It should be noted that although Internet Explorer does support some of the relevant elements, it does not support them in any fashion in which it is correct to use those elements. Internet Explorer only supports the elements as proprietary extensions to HTML. True XHTML 1.1 must be sent with the content type "application/xhtml+xml" or a generic XML content type, which Internet Explorer does not recognize as a webpage without the application of special hacks.