<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
     xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
     xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
     xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">
	<channel>
	<title>MetaFilter posts tagged with consortium</title>
	<link>http://www.metafilter.com/tags/consortium</link>
	<description>Posts tagged with 'consortium' at MetaFilter.</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 25 Feb 2003 11:16:42 -0800</pubDate> <lastBuildDate>Tue, 25 Feb 2003 11:16:42 -0800</lastBuildDate>

	<language>en-us</language>
	<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
	<ttl>60</ttl>
	<item>
		<title>W3C members&apos; sites put to the test.</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/23852/W3C%2Dmembers%2Dsites%2Dput%2Dto%2Dthe%2Dtest</link>
		<description>&lt;a href="http://www.markokarppinen.com/20030224.html"&gt;State of Validation 2003.&lt;/a&gt; Off the 430 &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Member/List/&quot;&gt;W3C members&lt;/a&gt;, only 28 (6.5%) have sites that validate with the &lt;a href=&quot;http://validator.w3.org/&quot;&gt;W3C validator&lt;/a&gt; as either HTML or XHTML! This represents an increase in standards compliance of 75.7% from the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.metafilter.com/mefi/15007&quot;&gt;year ago tests&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;small&gt;[via the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.zeldman.com/daily/0203b.shtml#dogfood&quot;&gt;big orange Z&lt;/a&gt;]&lt;/small&gt;  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2003:site.23852</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Feb 2003 11:16:42 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>Consortium</category>
		<category>HTML</category>
		<category>Standards</category>
		<category>Validation</category>
		<category>W3C</category>
		<category>Web</category>
		<category>Wide</category>
		<category>World</category>
		<category>XHTML</category>
		<dc:creator>riffola</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title></title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/19148/</link>
		<description>&lt;a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/82feb/8202diamond1.htm"&gt;Diamonds&lt;/a&gt; , a symbol of love for a large part of this century. Yet there is an underlying monopoly who have socially engineered the whole entire idea that a &quot;Diamond is Forever&quot;.  Does your notion of a diamond change knowing that a consortium is ensuring that their Monopoly is Forever?  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2002:site.19148</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Aug 2002 06:54:13 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>consortium</category>
		<category>diamond</category>
		<category>diamonds</category>
		<category>monopoly</category>
		<dc:creator>mutantdisco!</dc:creator>
	</item>
      
	</channel>
</rss>


