[roto]

an apropos link appeared on pixelsurgeon today:

http://www.37signals.com/svn/archives/000600.php

I tend to agree with most of it. While there should be standards, we tend to alienate the casual user in some cases.

[/R7]

agreed. too much is said about standards.
but the reality is, the average user doesnt give a flying fuck wuts going on behind the scenes, if the site doesnt appeal to them, they wont go there.

how many users do you know, goto a site, love the look, hate the code, and never visit it again, because it doesnt work in a browser on an OS they've never used, or pratically heard about for that matter? -_-

building a site based on certain standards should be second nature, not 'second' on the todo list. build the site for users, or at the very least, yourself, so you can appreciate the site, not the code which built it.

ps. i think i re-wrote this post like 8 times now, and still going /me sigh

[Mik]

bollox

totally missing the point.

the reason for standards is so that the user doesnt feel he / she has to look at the code, change browsers, etc when the info doesnt display correctly.

if people adopt standards and use them (it really isnt difficult), then everyone can only benefit.

if designers say fuck standards what hope is there.

[Stickman]

Well said (apart from the bit about it not being difficult).

I've seen a few people/articles recently saying we should concentrate on the user, not on standards. This is arse. Usability and accessibility exist side-by-side. It's not an 'either or' choice. Seems people who can't keep up are trying to find excuses to stick with what they know.

Make your site with the end users in mind (all of them) and not just for you and your client.

[sleepingfish]

Originally Posted by Stickman

It's not an 'either or' choice

Nail on the head

[/R7]

the reason for standards is so that the user doesnt feel he / she has to look at the code, change browsers, etc when the info doesnt display correctly.

dont know if i mentioned this in my first post so if im adding new material covering up for some remark w/e flame.

i understand why standards are there, well i guess i 'partly' understand, but at the same time.
common sense is what drives my coding little fingers, not the knowledge of W3C website, although ive found it particularly helpful in the past looking for certain tags and such.

PS just read my post, thats the post i rewrote a dozen and a half times + your birthday O_o... so i probably said what i said above, once in those 8times.
meh, i guess thats what i get for being a legally retarded

[Mik]

Originally Posted by /R7

i understand why standards are there, well i guess i 'partly' understand, but at the same time.
common sense is what drives my coding little fingers, not the knowledge of W3C website,

just like the other day, common sense told me my bike would go faster with two chains, 5 wheels and a donkey attached.

it was only after consultation with halfords that all i required was some air in the tyres.

[Brown]

Originally Posted by /R7

common sense is what drives my coding little fingers, not the knowledge of W3C website,

you monkey's really need to start reading that shit if you're going to get anywhere. its not that hard to understand and it will open your eyes to many new (and proper) techniques. you'll also be able to open your mouth in a client meeting without sounding like a cock.

[gray]

there is no future for sites and developers not complying with standards imho

mik take no notice of those boiler suited novices, donkeys are what you need

[/R7]

not that hard to understand and it will open your eyes to many new (and proper) techniques

/
hence, the reason why i go there for tags.... and such? errr i hate re-itterating myself, but obviously needed

w3c is a great site, i never intended to demean the quality of it, or anything, not like i did tobegin with, but im curious how that comment could provoke a retarded comment such as miks earlier, everyone knows donkeys are depreciated, llamma's will create a slicker streamline with their arch'd backs and such.

i found W3schools.org very benefitial for looking @ CSS when i needed to get my ass off the ground after 6months of not doing a website. i use what i gain from both those sites, and work from there, and if my site breaks, infront of me or on others machines, i will do everything in my know-how to fix it and make it cross compatible on every platform, its a pet peave of mine that i dont like living with if its not right.

& if you care to mock me further i dont have a problem opening up a flame thread to continue the mockery. obviously common sense varies person to person, but i guess theres a difference in finding your reference material on fixxing a bike from barney' the dinosaurs website, and speaking of jackasses barney takes the cake.

& if you think my common sense is flawed, then i think the w3c validators are flawed as well.
before my comp needed formatting, which took about 10+sites of mine out from under me, never to return :-(. all 10 of those sites were 100% validated by the w3c website. but obviously that has no bearing wut so ever on this conversation. and is completely rubbish so we can dismiss that fact entirely.....

wakeup to this nonsense

@ brown & Gray:
i dont care, my web skills suck i know that and i dont dare dispute it. but im at least satisfied with the designs i come up with. The web isnt my means of making money nor do i expect shmo's to pay me for my work. its my creative outlet along with drawing and painting. and it allows me to write and talk to others, something which i enjoy vs having to deal with clientel and scripting for some company.

IF, i was designing a website for a client, common sense once again, would tell me i need to have the site validate. which would mean standards would be needed as im building it. and to make sure everything was on the up n up i would goto the w3c website for help in validation and information on keeping the site abiding by standards.

If you think im a retard by all means think that, cus im pretty much as dumb as you could imagine, & chances are you monkeys could be right.

[Mik]

Originally Posted by /R7

/
cus im pretty much as dumb as you could imagine

i can imagine.

[smallbeer]

Will someone please explain to me what monkeys, donkeys and llamas have to do with anything?

[Bill Posters]

As Nanna Moon likes to say - If you have to ask, you'll never know.