On 11/28/05, Jeremy David <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well, simply as a matter of fact, it's actually untrue that the site is > functional. Functional for you? Maybe. For everyone? Not exactly. > > Check this out: > > http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.openbsd.org&charset=%28det > ect+automatically%29& > > There are 5 errors on the main page alone. That means that no matter how > useful the content on the website is, the code breaks down for a lot of > people.
No, that means it is broken for the w3 validator. Please cite one browser for which the content cannot be read correctly. > Standards are important. Where HTML is concerned, they're doubly so, > because there are so many different clients (browsers) being used by so many > different kinds of people. > http://www.webstandards.org/about/ > http://www.zeldman.com/dwws/ Very nice, I wonder why firefox on my amd64 is slow as hell with the last page, for the little content it has. probably bad design. > I'm really underwhelmed by comments like "Why don't you cut the guy some > slack" and "I don't speak for Nick, but I imagine he probably feels a > unappreciated when folks feel like nitpicking his "design"" > > Excusing errors in the interests of not hurting someone's feelings is a > great way to end up with a third-rate product. > The website is hacky, invalid, and broken. broken? which page? which browser? > Not to mention the fact that most > people think it's ugly. If that hurts someone's feelings then I'm sorry, but > it does no one any favors to ignore errors and broken code. Call me a pervert, but actually I sort of like the "vintage" look of it. FreeBSD looks so boringly corporate these days... I am all for good design, good html and everything, but frankly I don't feel this kind of discussions helps anything. Yes, having checked the html sources (with my eyes, not with the validator), I think using 'better html' could probably help the maintainance a bit. So what? Would I impose that to the guy that is actually working on the content? If it were to be changed (maybe it will someday), it would be done for pragmatic reasons (or for the very own pleasure of the openbsd team, but that is another story), not to satisfy a dogmatic standpoint. Which browser? which page? Eric.
