RE: [WSG] Appropriate postings
I like the newbie questions personally! This list was a HUGE help to me when I was learning CSS (it still is a huge help when I come across a problem) and I would like to think that it hasn't lost that community. Recently a member of this list hugely helped one of my colleagues with a layout issue, which was a great encouragement to him. Let's not be too intimidating to new comers, I think it's wonderful when people want to learn, and a community is an ideal place for guidance and advice on best practice. The mixture of people make it interesting, I would certainly would get bored if this list became purely a place for academic comment on advanced (X)HTML CSS..! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erickson, Kevin (DOE) Sent: 06 August 2008 14:30 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG] Appropriate postings Thank you!!! I agree 100%. Nothing is better than trying to find information from a well rounded group. That is what makes this list so great! For some one to say they want a newbie level list, tells me they have not thought it through. We should ask those that don't want to participate in a subject to delete/ignore it. Sincerely, kevin -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike at Green-Beast.com Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 6:11 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Appropriate postings On lists like these, newbies can become gurus. And the cycle unselfishly gets repeated. :) Respectfully, Mike Cherim http://green-beast.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Appropriate postings
I have no problem with elementary questions about Web standards. But there are perhaps too many posts about how to write basic HTML mark-up and elementary CSS. This is especially true when the 'poster' has apparently not even tried to validate it (and, therefore, not seriously tried to solve the problem themselves). Should we not, at least, expect a list contributor to know the basics of HTML and CSS, for example. At the other end of the scale, there are sometimes posts which seem to be more about how to 'work around' Web standards to achieve a particular design rather than DESIGN to Web Standards in the first place (usually a knock-on effect due to graphic designers pretending to be Web designers). On Tue, August 5, 2008 10:00 pm, Jody Tate wrote: I'm a lurker on the list, but primarily because the list, so far, has seemed like a place where people come for help solving specific, remedial problems with long-standing (in internet-time) solutions well-documented on the internet and in books. On 8/5/08 11:10 AM, Rick Faircloth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And I would like to know what a list on any subject is for if not for helping people understand the most basic principles and application of a give practice. A list on any topic must embrace all level of participants, beginners and advanced, alike. If we think of the list as a classroom, a teaching environment, then it's standard practice to have separate beginning, advanced, etc. classes. At the university level, for example (in the US), classes at the 100 level tackle different issues than classes at the 200, 300 and 400 level. A list on a topic isn't required to embrace all levels of expertise. I've participated in many mailings lists where some requests for basic help were considered off-topic. Requests for help when answers can be found by via searches or reading books were often seen as inappropriate. I'd advocate (at the risk of sounding snobby), as some have suggested, for different lists--one to accommodate beginners and another to accommodate other developers interested, not in help with standards, but in the standards themselves. Anyone who thinks a list about web standards should not first have as its mission to teach and clarify the basics of the tools of standardization, such as CSS, is mistaken. Unless expressly stated, a list must cater to the lowest common denominator of its participants, not the highest. By doing so, those on the bottom are lifted up, instead of always being pushed down and kept in the dark. To think a list about web standards doesn't need to have teaching as its first mission is not mistaken, it's considering that a different goal or multiple goals might be acceptable. Web standards are not new, though they may be new to some list users. Teaching can be a function, but if helping others with the basics is its sole function, as it's becoming here, it neglects another portion of the list's members, those who have been using web standards since their inception and hope to have extended discussions about, for example, XHTML vs. HTML5, CSS3, current and upcoming browser implementation of standards, emerging standards and so on. -jody -- Jody Tate http://staff.washington.edu/jtate/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Appropriate postings
I totally agree which is why I arose the subject in the first place. A person interested in the building standards shouldn't expect the building standards group to tell them how to use a hammer. Same goes here. - Original Message - From: Stuart Foulstone [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2008 6:08 PM Subject: Re: [WSG] Appropriate postings I have no problem with elementary questions about Web standards. But there are perhaps too many posts about how to write basic HTML mark-up and elementary CSS. This is especially true when the 'poster' has apparently not even tried to validate it (and, therefore, not seriously tried to solve the problem themselves). Should we not, at least, expect a list contributor to know the basics of HTML and CSS, for example. At the other end of the scale, there are sometimes posts which seem to be more about how to 'work around' Web standards to achieve a particular design rather than DESIGN to Web Standards in the first place (usually a knock-on effect due to graphic designers pretending to be Web designers). On Tue, August 5, 2008 10:00 pm, Jody Tate wrote: I'm a lurker on the list, but primarily because the list, so far, has seemed like a place where people come for help solving specific, remedial problems with long-standing (in internet-time) solutions well-documented on the internet and in books. On 8/5/08 11:10 AM, Rick Faircloth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And I would like to know what a list on any subject is for if not for helping people understand the most basic principles and application of a give practice. A list on any topic must embrace all level of participants, beginners and advanced, alike. If we think of the list as a classroom, a teaching environment, then it's standard practice to have separate beginning, advanced, etc. classes. At the university level, for example (in the US), classes at the 100 level tackle different issues than classes at the 200, 300 and 400 level. A list on a topic isn't required to embrace all levels of expertise. I've participated in many mailings lists where some requests for basic help were considered off-topic. Requests for help when answers can be found by via searches or reading books were often seen as inappropriate. I'd advocate (at the risk of sounding snobby), as some have suggested, for different lists--one to accommodate beginners and another to accommodate other developers interested, not in help with standards, but in the standards themselves. Anyone who thinks a list about web standards should not first have as its mission to teach and clarify the basics of the tools of standardization, such as CSS, is mistaken. Unless expressly stated, a list must cater to the lowest common denominator of its participants, not the highest. By doing so, those on the bottom are lifted up, instead of always being pushed down and kept in the dark. To think a list about web standards doesn't need to have teaching as its first mission is not mistaken, it's considering that a different goal or multiple goals might be acceptable. Web standards are not new, though they may be new to some list users. Teaching can be a function, but if helping others with the basics is its sole function, as it's becoming here, it neglects another portion of the list's members, those who have been using web standards since their inception and hope to have extended discussions about, for example, XHTML vs. HTML5, CSS3, current and upcoming browser implementation of standards, emerging standards and so on. -jody -- Jody Tate http://staff.washington.edu/jtate/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Appropriate postings
I understand your concern, Stuart. The list shouldn't become a first-responder to code someone's problem. But we should be aware, also, that usually, someone who posts even what seems to be a rudimentary problem has actually tried to solve it on their own and is just missing the solution. Those new to CSS and other web standards tools will often be reluctant to post their own attempts to code a solution and will just ask for input on a solution. It's a fine line to walk, but we have to be careful not to read behind the post and assume that someone is just asking others to do their work for them. Rick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Stuart Foulstone Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2008 4:09 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Appropriate postings I have no problem with elementary questions about Web standards. But there are perhaps too many posts about how to write basic HTML mark-up and elementary CSS. This is especially true when the 'poster' has apparently not even tried to validate it (and, therefore, not seriously tried to solve the problem themselves). Should we not, at least, expect a list contributor to know the basics of HTML and CSS, for example. At the other end of the scale, there are sometimes posts which seem to be more about how to 'work around' Web standards to achieve a particular design rather than DESIGN to Web Standards in the first place (usually a knock-on effect due to graphic designers pretending to be Web designers). On Tue, August 5, 2008 10:00 pm, Jody Tate wrote: I'm a lurker on the list, but primarily because the list, so far, has seemed like a place where people come for help solving specific, remedial problems with long-standing (in internet-time) solutions well-documented on the internet and in books. On 8/5/08 11:10 AM, Rick Faircloth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And I would like to know what a list on any subject is for if not for helping people understand the most basic principles and application of a give practice. A list on any topic must embrace all level of participants, beginners and advanced, alike. If we think of the list as a classroom, a teaching environment, then it's standard practice to have separate beginning, advanced, etc. classes. At the university level, for example (in the US), classes at the 100 level tackle different issues than classes at the 200, 300 and 400 level. A list on a topic isn't required to embrace all levels of expertise. I've participated in many mailings lists where some requests for basic help were considered off-topic. Requests for help when answers can be found by via searches or reading books were often seen as inappropriate. I'd advocate (at the risk of sounding snobby), as some have suggested, for different lists--one to accommodate beginners and another to accommodate other developers interested, not in help with standards, but in the standards themselves. Anyone who thinks a list about web standards should not first have as its mission to teach and clarify the basics of the tools of standardization, such as CSS, is mistaken. Unless expressly stated, a list must cater to the lowest common denominator of its participants, not the highest. By doing so, those on the bottom are lifted up, instead of always being pushed down and kept in the dark. To think a list about web standards doesn't need to have teaching as its first mission is not mistaken, it's considering that a different goal or multiple goals might be acceptable. Web standards are not new, though they may be new to some list users. Teaching can be a function, but if helping others with the basics is its sole function, as it's becoming here, it neglects another portion of the list's members, those who have been using web standards since their inception and hope to have extended discussions about, for example, XHTML vs. HTML5, CSS3, current and upcoming browser implementation of standards, emerging standards and so on. -jody -- Jody Tate http://staff.washington.edu/jtate/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.5.12/1594 - Release Date: 8/5/2008 9:49 PM
RE: [WSG] Appropriate postings
Following your construction analogy, people new to standards might know how to use a nail hammer, but not realize that what's called for in a situation is a dry-wall hammer. That's where some guidance even on the tools end is needed. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Adam Martin Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2008 4:38 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Appropriate postings I totally agree which is why I arose the subject in the first place. A person interested in the building standards shouldn't expect the building standards group to tell them how to use a hammer. Same goes here. - Original Message - From: Stuart Foulstone [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2008 6:08 PM Subject: Re: [WSG] Appropriate postings I have no problem with elementary questions about Web standards. But there are perhaps too many posts about how to write basic HTML mark-up and elementary CSS. This is especially true when the 'poster' has apparently not even tried to validate it (and, therefore, not seriously tried to solve the problem themselves). Should we not, at least, expect a list contributor to know the basics of HTML and CSS, for example. At the other end of the scale, there are sometimes posts which seem to be more about how to 'work around' Web standards to achieve a particular design rather than DESIGN to Web Standards in the first place (usually a knock-on effect due to graphic designers pretending to be Web designers). On Tue, August 5, 2008 10:00 pm, Jody Tate wrote: I'm a lurker on the list, but primarily because the list, so far, has seemed like a place where people come for help solving specific, remedial problems with long-standing (in internet-time) solutions well-documented on the internet and in books. On 8/5/08 11:10 AM, Rick Faircloth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And I would like to know what a list on any subject is for if not for helping people understand the most basic principles and application of a give practice. A list on any topic must embrace all level of participants, beginners and advanced, alike. If we think of the list as a classroom, a teaching environment, then it's standard practice to have separate beginning, advanced, etc. classes. At the university level, for example (in the US), classes at the 100 level tackle different issues than classes at the 200, 300 and 400 level. A list on a topic isn't required to embrace all levels of expertise. I've participated in many mailings lists where some requests for basic help were considered off-topic. Requests for help when answers can be found by via searches or reading books were often seen as inappropriate. I'd advocate (at the risk of sounding snobby), as some have suggested, for different lists--one to accommodate beginners and another to accommodate other developers interested, not in help with standards, but in the standards themselves. Anyone who thinks a list about web standards should not first have as its mission to teach and clarify the basics of the tools of standardization, such as CSS, is mistaken. Unless expressly stated, a list must cater to the lowest common denominator of its participants, not the highest. By doing so, those on the bottom are lifted up, instead of always being pushed down and kept in the dark. To think a list about web standards doesn't need to have teaching as its first mission is not mistaken, it's considering that a different goal or multiple goals might be acceptable. Web standards are not new, though they may be new to some list users. Teaching can be a function, but if helping others with the basics is its sole function, as it's becoming here, it neglects another portion of the list's members, those who have been using web standards since their inception and hope to have extended discussions about, for example, XHTML vs. HTML5, CSS3, current and upcoming browser implementation of standards, emerging standards and so on. -jody -- Jody Tate http://staff.washington.edu/jtate/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http
RE: [WSG] Appropriate postings
Thank you!!! I agree 100%. Nothing is better than trying to find information from a well rounded group. That is what makes this list so great! For some one to say they want a newbie level list, tells me they have not thought it through. We should ask those that don't want to participate in a subject to delete/ignore it. Sincerely, kevin -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike at Green-Beast.com Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 6:11 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Appropriate postings On lists like these, newbies can become gurus. And the cycle unselfishly gets repeated. :) Respectfully, Mike Cherim http://green-beast.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Appropriate postings
I look at the list guidelines to see if I am appropriate http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm where it says the list is Provide web standards information and assistance to developers... The mail list covers any topic associated with web standards including: * Implementing Web Standards - eg: technologies such as HTML, XHTML, CSS, DOM, UAAG, RDF, XML, JavaScript and EcmaScript It seems my questions are about implementing Web Standards. I certainly agree with the earlier posters who suggested I make sure to validate before posting questions on what I do. That would have saved some dumb questions on my behalf. I do think we should probably add requiring validation before posting How To my sites broken questions to the list. I also do think that it is possible their are lurkers on my list learning web standards and just starting with tableless design who may benefit from my questions. Going back 20 years to college I remember feeling like an idiot being the only one to ask a question in class when I didn't understand something only to have a half a dozen people thank me for my question after class because they were too afraid to ask. So I do believe there are other who may learn from my questions. There may be a benefit to the group to have multiple mail lists for different aspects of Web Standards including a newbie list where people can seek help. I would also be open to having a standard part of a subject line like Dumb Newbie asking question :) to allow people who don't want to get involved with helping to more easily filter my mail. I can tell you it will probably be 6 months to a year before I can add much more to the list besides asking questions so you may just with to use your email filter to put my posts to your trash bin and take it out again this time next year. I know I am supposed to thank people off list for help but as long as it is part of a longer posting I will just add some thanks for your help. I do learn alot from this list both from my questions on the subject I just read. Michael Horowitz Your Computer Consultant http://yourcomputerconsultant.com 561-394-9079 Adam Martin wrote: Sorry to come across blunt - but I don't think the web standards group is meant to be a teacher of css. Great that people on here are wanting to learn. But there are plenty of other places dedicated to these sort of things. - Original Message - From: Michael Horowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 2:16 AM Subject: Re: [WSG] Positioning was Extra white line on the top of my list In playing I've found using the relative positioning working pretty good for me. Is it just a matter of personal preference what I use then? Thanks for the article I really haven't understood negative margins. Michael Horowitz Your Computer Consultant http://yourcomputerconsultant.com 561-394-9079 David Hucklesby wrote: On Sat, 02 Aug 2008 23:32:16 -0400, Michael Horowitz wrote: The live page is horowitzfamily.net. I'm just learning positioning and this seemed to work. The issue as mentioned earlier was transparency in my image. however I am just learning to do css without tables and really don't know what I should be doing for positioning. Quite honestly in hacking around this worked. I'll be happy to get feedback on better techniques for the future CSS gives you a lot of options for positioning elements on a page. As with all design issues, the best choice is usually a compromise, depending on what you want to achieve. My first choice for positioning elements is often to use margins - including negative margins on occasion. See this CommunityMX article for more: http://www.communitymx.com/content/article.cfm?cid=b0029 Hope this helps. Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [WSG] Appropriate postings
Sorry to come across blunt - but I don't think the web standards group is meant to be a teacher of css. Great that people on here are wanting to learn. But there are plenty of other places dedicated to these sort of things. And I would like to know what a list on any subject is for if not for helping people understand the most basic principles and application of a give practice. A list on any topic must embrace all level of participants, beginners and advanced, alike. If one cannot expect to participate in this list and learn CSS, then it needs to be made known that this is a list for advanced web standards gurus only...those who need to understand something basic need not post...you will only be belittled for your ignorance, not tutored and nurtured in your quest for coding to web standards. My personal opinion is that the moderators need to be more moderate in their enforcement of list standards. In other words, chill out a little and let this be a living, breathing community of participants who do think other thoughts they'd like to share or need help on topics that might not fit a tightly screwed definition of web standards, but that don't justify joining another list just to ask a question that is slightly oblique to the main list subject matter. Anyone who thinks a list about web standards should not first have as its mission to teach and clarify the basics of the tools of standardization, such as CSS, is mistaken. Unless expressly stated, a list must cater to the lowest common denominator of its participants, not the highest. By doing so, those on the bottom are lifted up, instead of always being pushed down and kept in the dark. And, yes, I agree with another poster, that there is a great need for a Standards Newbie list, where *all* questions are welcome, if this list won't suffice. Rick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Horowitz Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 1:16 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Appropriate postings I look at the list guidelines to see if I am appropriate http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm where it says the list is Provide web standards information and assistance to developers... The mail list covers any topic associated with web standards including: * Implementing Web Standards - eg: technologies such as HTML, XHTML, CSS, DOM, UAAG, RDF, XML, JavaScript and EcmaScript It seems my questions are about implementing Web Standards. I certainly agree with the earlier posters who suggested I make sure to validate before posting questions on what I do. That would have saved some dumb questions on my behalf. I do think we should probably add requiring validation before posting How To my sites broken questions to the list. I also do think that it is possible their are lurkers on my list learning web standards and just starting with tableless design who may benefit from my questions. Going back 20 years to college I remember feeling like an idiot being the only one to ask a question in class when I didn't understand something only to have a half a dozen people thank me for my question after class because they were too afraid to ask. So I do believe there are other who may learn from my questions. There may be a benefit to the group to have multiple mail lists for different aspects of Web Standards including a newbie list where people can seek help. I would also be open to having a standard part of a subject line like Dumb Newbie asking question :) to allow people who don't want to get involved with helping to more easily filter my mail. I can tell you it will probably be 6 months to a year before I can add much more to the list besides asking questions so you may just with to use your email filter to put my posts to your trash bin and take it out again this time next year. I know I am supposed to thank people off list for help but as long as it is part of a longer posting I will just add some thanks for your help. I do learn alot from this list both from my questions on the subject I just read. Michael Horowitz Your Computer Consultant http://yourcomputerconsultant.com 561-394-9079 Adam Martin wrote: Sorry to come across blunt - but I don't think the web standards group is meant to be a teacher of css. Great that people on here are wanting to learn. But there are plenty of other places dedicated to these sort of things. - Original Message - From: Michael Horowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 2:16 AM Subject: Re: [WSG] Positioning was Extra white line on the top of my list In playing I've found using the relative positioning working pretty good for me. Is it just a matter of personal preference what I use then? Thanks for the article I really haven't understood negative margins
Re: [WSG] Appropriate postings
I'm a lurker on the list, but primarily because the list, so far, has seemed like a place where people come for help solving specific, remedial problems with long-standing (in internet-time) solutions well-documented on the internet and in books. On 8/5/08 11:10 AM, Rick Faircloth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And I would like to know what a list on any subject is for if not for helping people understand the most basic principles and application of a give practice. A list on any topic must embrace all level of participants, beginners and advanced, alike. If we think of the list as a classroom, a teaching environment, then it's standard practice to have separate beginning, advanced, etc. classes. At the university level, for example (in the US), classes at the 100 level tackle different issues than classes at the 200, 300 and 400 level. A list on a topic isn't required to embrace all levels of expertise. I've participated in many mailings lists where some requests for basic help were considered off-topic. Requests for help when answers can be found by via searches or reading books were often seen as inappropriate. I'd advocate (at the risk of sounding snobby), as some have suggested, for different lists--one to accommodate beginners and another to accommodate other developers interested, not in help with standards, but in the standards themselves. Anyone who thinks a list about web standards should not first have as its mission to teach and clarify the basics of the tools of standardization, such as CSS, is mistaken. Unless expressly stated, a list must cater to the lowest common denominator of its participants, not the highest. By doing so, those on the bottom are lifted up, instead of always being pushed down and kept in the dark. To think a list about web standards doesn't need to have teaching as its first mission is not mistaken, it's considering that a different goal or multiple goals might be acceptable. Web standards are not new, though they may be new to some list users. Teaching can be a function, but if helping others with the basics is its sole function, as it's becoming here, it neglects another portion of the list's members, those who have been using web standards since their inception and hope to have extended discussions about, for example, XHTML vs. HTML5, CSS3, current and upcoming browser implementation of standards, emerging standards and so on. -jody -- Jody Tate http://staff.washington.edu/jtate/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Appropriate postings
On lists like these, newbies can become gurus. And the cycle unselfishly gets repeated. :) Respectfully, Mike Cherim http://green-beast.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Appropriate postings
Definitely a hope of mine. I would really think it might be best to use subject headings to allow people who aren't interested in helping to skip over posts. Michael Horowitz Your Computer Consultant http://yourcomputerconsultant.com 561-394-9079 Mike at Green-Beast.com wrote: On lists like these, newbies can become gurus. And the cycle unselfishly gets repeated. :) Respectfully, Mike Cherim http://green-beast.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
