On 27/02/2006, at 4:08 PM, Ben Buchanan wrote:
Not to mention the fact that the people who implemented those
bohemoths can't always separate standards advice from personal
vilification - no matter how polite, rational, independently
verfiable...
I think its important to understand that, for a lot of people who
actually work on a site, when you say "your site doesn't validate/
isn't accessible/ doesn't work in my browser" what they hear is "your
skills are no good / you don't know how to do your job/ say goodbye
to that next payrise"
It takes incredible tact to tell people what a problem is without
making it feel to them like a personal attack - and I don't know
about you, but I'm a geek; tact isn't on my strong list :)
I'm not saying "don't confront" - no way! But I am saying that if you
can't reach the right audience (the people who sign off on the bills,
quite often, not the developer) then don't be surprised when they act
like you have hit them in the face with a wet fish.
Actually, Sunny, have you thought about maybe you hit a home run and
got all the guy's hot buttons?
Maybe (s)he knew all those things were a problem and couldn't bear
them being brought up by (cough, splutter) a *customer*
<g>
Lea
~ although I still can't believe the gall of a response like that:
'your problems with our site are your own problem.' Amazing! Can you
imagine going into a supermarket and, upon asking for help finding
the eggs, being told that the supermarket layout is your problem;
find them yourself? <g>
--
Lea de Groot
Brisbane, Australia
******************************************************
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
******************************************************