===
(should have type="text/javascript" attribute :)
===
In order to validate for the w3c parser. But only in order for that.
For the rest it will work, also if failing validation, no human will
ever notice, no browser will ever complain, no version of browsers will
fail to understand it.
This at least until that very happy day shall come when a browser will
FINALLY utterly refuse to parse a script because it lacks the type, and
shall send all awry in the name of w3c strict validation. Till that
very very happy time, we can omit it with sheer awful impunity and go
to no jail despite the abominable crime LOL :-)
Ah yeah, spreading good programming practice & "quality assurance"...
right I forgot :-)
ps no ad personam/hominem/guy provocation meant, really. It's just that
with all these pages failing validation for these nuisances, we at
times get the impression that when dealing wsith the w3c parsers we are
like Romeo and Juliet in Shakespeare:
===
peace, peace, mercutio, peace! thou talk'st of nothing.
===
No type parser, no type; failed validation!! but peace, peace, parser,
peace! thou talk'st of nothing. :-)
I am afraid I shall miss the following harrowing explanation (not by
you, I know you meant it with a dash of humour), full of rage and fury
and signifying nothing, about the outermost importance of the type and
of the strict validation and of how much of an incredible hopeless
crooked disgusting moron and despicable blackguard I am to vilify such
an important momentuous pivotal thing like the type attribute in the
script tag.... :)
ciao
Alberto
http://www.unitedscripters.com/