Alex Hardy

Hello there!

What a load of ill-informed bollocks.

I’d expect better than this from the BBC.

The W3C is “the web’s regulatory body”, is it?

Thank you, website designer Leonie Watson, for your insightful remarks.

[CSS is] … quite a new technology, it’s only been around a couple of years.

Oh really?

These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • Ma.gnolia
  • Technorati

Posted on Tuesday, October 31st, 2006 at 5:39 pm under Web standards. You can post a comment, or trackback from your own site.

2 comments for “What a load of ill-informed bollocks.”

  1. BrentP
    October 31st, 2006 at 8:45 pm

    a) Zeldman is a backwards c**t who deserves to be burnt as a heretic. I know we’ll differ on that, but I’ll explain all in a forth coming post to the blog about web standards.

    b) if we’re talking about sites that employ CSS as laid out by those jokers at the W3C, then sure. Hell, we’re in a situation where no browser fully conforms to CSS2.0, yet the W3C are pissing about revising it as 2.1 (ironically to conform more with what the browsers conform to… remind me again who’s supposed to set the standards?) and even playing with CSS3.0.

    CSS as proper implementation (taking on a style sheet doesn’t count) is a very new technology and a very good portion of the net won’t even pass CSS1.0 standards (I know for a fact a lot of my stuff won’t).

    The problem is because you can count the number of people who understand the crap the W3C puts out on one hand even if you decide to chop off three fingers first.

    And be fair, they’re a website designer, one expects them to be clueless :p

  2. alex
    October 31st, 2006 at 10:05 pm

    I have a very clear mental image of the W3C, they look rather like a bunch of Geography teachers in tweed jackets with leather elbows. Probably with beards.

    With WCAG 2 they’ve completely disappeared up their own arse. CSS should be being developed to achieve the stylistic treatments designers want, not what those bloody academics think we *should* want.

    S’true though about IE5, for its time it was a fine piece of work.

Comments are welcome. Keep it friendly and on-topic please.

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>