James Jeffery wrote: > Interesting, although i didnt read a word of it, its all in dutch, but i > got the english summary. > I tried translating it with Babelfish, the result was somewhat incoherent but more intelligible (to me) than Dutch.
> As for certification, its useless as one pointed out, They're not useless, though their main benefit is demonstrating a level of technical competency to non-technical people - eg. managers, HR departments and recruiters, rather than as a direct benefit to the certificate holder. > technologys on the internet change all the time. This is simply not true, HTML 4.01 was published in December 1999. CSS 2.0 was published in May 1998, neither of these are obsolete. Even in terms of practical implementations, IE6 was launched in 2001 and not superseded until late last year. What changes more frequently is the more nebulous concept of 'best practice' rather than the standards themselves, and those, I think, change more gradually over time rather than the epochal pattern of browser/standards release cycles. Even if a certificate were only valid for one year it would still have some long term value - someone with a two year old certification ought to have more value in a potential employer's eyes than someone who's never gained any certification at all. Perhaps the certification process itself should include some portion of 'keeping up' - ie. reading mailing lists and blogs, attending conferences etc. - similar to professional development programmes that already exist in management and other parts of IT? Rob ******************************************************************* List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *******************************************************************
