New Code of Practice

[Mark]

New code of practice:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/06/05/ofcom_broadband_code_practice/

...notice who's name isn't here:

http://ofcom.org.uk/telecoms/ioi/copbb/list/

[David Livingstone]

In message <6dbg44l9s1vuap1vk...@4ax.com>, Mark
<nos...@nowhere.invalid> writes

>...notice who's name isn't here:
>
>http://ofcom.org.uk/telecoms/ioi/copbb/list/

They can't - their email is down :-)
--
David

[Malcolm Muir]

We need to complete some changes to our web site and procedures, then
we will be 'signing up'

--
Malcolm S. Muir D e m o n
Sunderland 322 Regents Park Road
England London N3 2QQ

[Dr J R Stockton]

In demon.service message <slrng4i13d.see.malcolm@muir-
et5.staff.demon.net>, Fri, 6 Jun 2008 09:33:33, Malcolm Muir
<mal...@demon.net> posted:

>On Thu, 05 Jun 2008 19:18:10 +0100, Mark <nos...@nowhere.invalid> wrote:
>>New code of practice:
>>
>>http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/06/05/ofcom_broadband_code_practice/
>>
>>...notice who's name isn't here:
>>
>>http://ofcom.org.uk/telecoms/ioi/copbb/list/
>
>We need to complete some changes to our web site and procedures, then
>we will be 'signing up'

Any chance of getting it to pass W3 validation, and doing user-friendly
things such as not altering the reader's main font size from the
preferred value set?

In function D8, the entire 8-line body could be replaced with just
return ((new Date()/1000)|0).toString(16)
to get a shorter result with the same real information content. BTW, it
appears that there may be 2 copies of D8 and of A in each page - how
about using an Include file and saving storage and bandwidth?

It's a good idea to read the newsgroup c.l.j and its FAQ. See below.

--
(c) John Stockton, nr London UK. ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk IE7 FF2 Op9 Sf3
news:comp.lang.javascript FAQ <URL:http://www.jibbering.com/faq/index.html>.
<URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/js-index.htm> jscr maths, dates, sources.
<URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> TP/BP/Delphi/jscr/&c, FAQ items, links.

[PhilT]

On Jun 6, 10:33 am, malc...@demon.net (Malcolm Muir) wrote:

> We need to complete some changes to our web site and procedures, then
> we will be 'signing up'

you could of course sign up now, as you have 6 months to comply in any
case (I doubt any of the signatories are remotely compliant with some
aspects).

Entanet are also not signed up, and appear to have reservations ie may
not be going to sign up.

Phil

[Denzil J. Brown]

If you meant Demon.

They are on the list now :)

>http://ofcom.org.uk/telecoms/ioi/copbb/list/

--
Denzil