21 June 2003 |
|
They say there is no such thing as bad publicity, but I definitely prefer when people defend me (both links in French, sorry). However, the latter kind of confirms the former, since without the pro-standard heinous asses there wouldn’t be a need for defending the garoo. I’ll leave them among themselves if they’re having fun at it, but I just wanted to reply to a couple of sentences. (Translated from French by me.) Not that you care, really (everyone involved here writes in French, so you’ve never heard of them), but I made this really long post and there’s no reason you shouldn’t enjoy it too.
I don’t dodge questions about CSS (and why CSS anyway? I use CSS!), it’s just that I have written quite enough on the subject in the past, so just refer to the archives. But what I want to answer is the rest: I don’t give a damn about running my HTML through the W3C’s validator, but that doesn’t mean my site only works with my own browser. First, because the browser I use is Mozilla, and something that runs through Mozilla is likely to work with everything else. Second, because I’ve been writing HTML for seven years now, and my sites have always been accessible for pretty much everybody. Hold on, let me reinstall Lynx (I don’t even test my pages with it anyway, I know the code I write is accessible). There. Well, you know what? I find it perfectly legible. But they didn’t care checking before they started bashing me, did they? And yet my site works, and that means it also works on a PDA, on a cell phone, and roughly works through vocal synthesis (it might screw the dates and times a bit, but that doesn’t matter that much; there aren’t even loads of contents to go through before you reach the main text!). What else do you want? Corollary (here) :
Standards aficionados are funny. They’ve been convincing themselves so hard that, without W3C-made standards, the world is lost, now they really believe it. Well, yeah, you can make so-called However… you guys are even more megalomaniac, you know? My site is a blog. That means, it’s a personal sites. If a couple people can’t display it, well, I don’t care! I’m not running a business here! To think that those idiots are the reason my legitimate readers can’t post comments anymore.
My (non-)friend, imagine for a second that, everytime you open your mouth, everytime you say something — be it something polemic (like this post) or telling something intimate that nobody’s morally entitled to comment on — someone would come and make a derogatory comment. Oh, nothing really mean, just a little tease. Every day. Day after day, as long as your blog exists. You wouldn’t mind? Oh, silly me: asking people to imagine what it feels like for the people they bully, nothing could ever come out of this. There’s just one thing that surprises me. In this thread, there hasn’t been any cries about me trying to get paid for making massively invalid sites. They must have forgotten, I suppose. So I’ll just make one last explanation: I’m not a P.S. I almost want to enable comments again just for the fun of getting insulted about this post. But that would require implementing the new layout for commenting, which I didn’t do (yet). P.S. Alright, as for the comments, it’s done. Meanwhile, I found a winner (I hate linking all those people, but, well, either that or I don’t discuss that topic, and I felt like discussing it, it seems). Want some evidence that my site is bad, bad, bad? Simple: it crashes Konqueror on a Zaurus! Whoa, as they say. I can bet that I, too, can crash a Zaurus, by typing No, wait. Windows CE isn’t as stupid as the Zaurus Linux, it’s not going to run something it can’t handle. (This is not an endorsement of Microsoft software; it’s just that it’s immensely stupid to run Konqueror on a PDA.) Gee, how idiotic can they get? I really feel bad for linking to that crap. |
|
|
|
|
2000 • 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 2001 • 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 2002 • 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 2003 • 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 2004 • 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 2005 • 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 2006 • 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 2007 • 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 2008 • 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 |