Praise JESUS!
- Started
- Last post
- 35 Responses
- bruno0
no what i am saying is that standards do not mean shit if the majority of the browsers do not care bout them. or like the analogy i was offering, if the majority of the people speak in vernecular the standards on proper english does not mean shit. no a bs in physics does not mean that one is an expert in web standards. "Or does bragging to a nerd about not being a nerd yet still having a BS in Physics make you a nerd? " exactly.
Oh so any other point of view is BS?
- gabriel_pc0
Absolutely not, the more viewpoints on this the better. I was pointing out how hypocritical it was of you to call people that support web standards nerds.
Your analogy about speaking vernacular is flawed because language doesn't have to be perfectly spoken to be understood. We humans have an amazing ability to guess and learn what people mean when they say something. Web browsers lack this ability.
A better analogy would be comparing Web standards to DVD format standards. Imagine how difficult it would be for someone to produce a DVD if there were no standards to follow. It wouldn't even be a DVD at that point, just a piece of plastic that contains some form of data.
A unified web standard is like world peace. It'll probably never be 100% supported, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try for it.
--official web standards nerd
- tfs__mag0
blah blah blah blah w3c, blah blah blah, MS is evil, blah blah blah blah standards... blah blah blah blah....
in case you guys didn't notice, there are lots of browsers out there now... one less browser isn't going to make a damn bit of difference, it's not like its uninstalling itself off of people's machines because they're no longer developing the product... get a grip
- gabriel_pc0
thanks tfs, that was constructive.
- tfs__mag0
you're quite welcome...
- tfs__mag0
oh and just to clarify, i was speaking on the original topic of netscape no longer being developed. you can go back to your exciting debate w/ mr physics now.
- gabriel_pc0
eh, that's getting boring. Let's all feel sorry for the Netscape folks that are jobless now.
OK, I'm done with that.
- mikeim0
Microsoft is going to stop making IE for the Mac.
someone may have already contributed that info but i was too laxy to read the whole thread.
- bruno0
no gabriel i think my analogy is right on and what you said just proves my point. as is now, HTML does not have to be perfectly written to be understood by the browser. If it did, alot of sites that you and i am sure both enjoy would not be 'understood' by the browser. I think the fact that the browser is flexible lowers the barriers to web publishing. Does Newstoday validate? I do not know nor do i care. What if it did not, the browser spit it out as garbage and newstoday did not have the resources to make it compliant. (they probably do but i am just hypothesizing)
- gabriel_pc0
Bruno, if I knew nothing about web scripting I would agree with you. Unfortunately I know a little bit.
Having web browsers that support malformed code are bad for a few reasons.
First, the applications themselves have to be considerably larger and more complex in order for them to read incorrect code and guess what it's supposed to mean. This results in slower page loading and poor performance overall.
Second, each time a new version of the browser comes out there's no telling whether or not the web pages that you built incorrectly will work in the new browser. Standards-compliant code is completely forward compatible.
Third, browsers that support incorrect code formatting only lead to more poorly written sites. Would you want a spell checker that instead of telling you when a word was wrong simply let it go?
Having a browser that supports incorrect code doesn't lower the barriers to web publishing, it lowers the quality and compatibility of the code.
Also, there's a whole world of accessibility reasons that make standards compliant code a must. Please read this article:
http://www.alistapart.com/storie…
and this one:
- gabriel_pc0
PS the only resource you need for making a page compliant is internet access and the ability to type http://w3c.org into your web browser
- unfittoprint0
exactly, gabriel. http://w3c.org/
is where browser development should get DOM, syntax, standards. And not inventing ones. Like IE uses to do.but I like those colored scrollbars...
- gabriel_pc0
In a perfect world they would have done that from the beginning. Unfortunately it's now up to web developers to push for the current browser developer(s) to adhere more fully to the web standards that the w3c decides on.
- unfittoprint0
the things with http://w3c.org/ is that they take so much god damn time to test and release the new standards. An example is the SVG (Scalable Vector Graphics -http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG/) implementation.
- gabriel_pc0
no doubt. svg is going to be the goods