hey guys I thought you should check this out

[jfuenchem]

Hey guys I thought you might like my Website. Check it out here. Please rate it once you have checked it out. I also appreciate suggestions on how to improve. Thanks guys!

[Lakie]

interesting...

[jfuenchem]

I'm sorry that you think that improvement is needed. To clear this up, I'm not comparing anyone to the Nazis - I simply used the Nazis as an example. How can I improve my site?

[Steve]

hmm, there doesnt really seem a decent argument IMHO.

The W3C has created many “computer languages”, such as HTML, XHTML, XML and CSS that can take weeks or sometimes even months to learn. Mastering these languages is very frustrating, and the W3C does not actively promote using a text editor that writes it for you with the click of a button. So basically, the W3C wants you to take weeks to learn a new language, and then spend hours writing it, instead of using a text editor that will only take a few minutes. That is completely insane.

that's kinda like saying nobody should speak or walk because it takes years to learn!

they set standards, that's all, how crazy things would be without guidelines, and there would be no internet, software or computers if there were no programming languages.

this is funny :

If you hate the W3C so much, why is this page made of HTML, a language that was created by the W3C?

It is true that this page is made of HTML, however this page wouldn’t exist otherwise.

nevertheless, interesting opinions...

[Steve]

Originally posted by jfuenchem
I'm sorry that you think that improvement is needed. To clear this up, I'm not comparing anyone to the Nazis - I simply used the Nazis as an example. How can I improve my site?

i think u read bb's signature

[Scott]

Altough they create guidelines no one is forced to follow them. They write the language and tell you how they think it should be coded.

Almost any software is the same, php, asp etc etc. They all have guidelines, weither you follow them or not is up to you.

There has to be quide lines in some manner, otherwise nothing would work and the web would be like Apple, Sony, and a few other companys making music files for certain players. Now we can't use Sony to listen to iPod in a nutshell. If there were no quidelines, we would all have 3 or 4 diffrent browsers for viewing the web, something I would hate.

If you shoot down WC3 you are shooting down what you probably love to do in your spair time, browse the web. More then enough people would be lost if there was no more web.

Maybe the creator of the language(s) and the WWW is fake, but who really cares? We have it don't we? Maybe he is the type of person that dosen't want to be famios with the press all up his butt, asking him 1,000 questions, not being able to live a normal life. I wouldn't want that.

I think if he wants to remain annoymous he has the right to do so.

Becides that point, it's free. How in the world do people complain about free stuff? They even try and teach people how to use what they wrote.

I am not for WC3 nor am I against it, I just really don't give a toot. I sounds like your whole argument is your own lack of information on WC3.

IMHO

[jfuenchem]

Steve, you say that "that's kinda like saying nobody should speak or walk because it takes years to learn!". Well, instead of typing out these stupid languages directly, you can just use a text editor. Speaking and walking have no "shortcuts". All these languages DO. Why type these languages directly when you have a text editior? You're right, they set standards, but instead of letting webmasters do what THEY want, the W3C is trying to take away freedoms of webmasters with their standards. Imagine a Web where "click here" can't be used as link text. Please read question, "Wouldn't the Web be a lot different if the W3C didn't exist?". With regards to the second quote, the answer also states that I have used a text editor to create my page. You're right, I did read bb's sig, I'm new here and I'm still learning.

[jfuenchem]

Panther, you're right that these standards are entirely voluntary. But the W3C wants them to be madnatory. Just remember, they want everyone to follow their standards. Imagine a Web where "click here" can't be used as link text. With regards to shutting down the W3C, please read question "You really think you can shut down the W3C?". If it was proven that this guy didn't exist, not many people would trust the W3C. I think that anyone should have the right to remain anonymous, but the W3C's reputation is on the line here. You're right about free stuff. But still, Imagine a Web where "click here" can't be used as link text. That's a little wierd.

[Steve]

do u have any info about why they don't want "click here" can't be used as link text?


just a quickie about text editors. u say the problem is about w3c not promoting text editors, but why would they promote something they dont create, or is that what you mean?

i'm sure they would promote a text editor that actually does a good job and promotes accessability to EVERY person that wants to use the internet, including disabled people and the visually impared.

the internet should be about accessablitlity which is exactly why there are web standards.


but seeing as you can get text editors and you use them then what is the issue? :/ if u dont want to learn something or use html then don't. the w3c is not going to sue you or put u in jail.

[jfuenchem]

Yes, I have info about this "click here" issue, visit http://www.w3.org/QA/Tips/noClickHere . About text editors, the question shouldn't be about whether they created a text editor or not. It takes weeks to learn these languages and takes hours to write - why wouldn't they promote a text editor? These "Web standards" are trying to take away freedoms of webmasters. I know I've said this 3 times but I'm going to say it again: Imagine a Web where "click here" can't be used as link text. That is what the W3C wants. You're right that the W3C can't sue me or put me in jail. But I'm sure thay would love to be ABLE to do so.

[jfuenchem]

Is it just me or is everyone here pro-W3C? I have taken this issue to other forums and have received a lot of support. This forum is so far the most "hostile". I know that you are all probably just neutral, but it seems as if you are all pro-W3C.

[Scott]

No I'm not pro-W3C. I just have a diffrent opinion on your topic.

You have a choise, they don't want you to use it but you still can. There not forcing you to do anything.

And they will never be manditory standards, they have been trying for years. It will never happen. As long as you have 3rd party browsers, there 'standards' are practily impossible to implent.

W3C makes the standards in the way you should code HTML, etc, but your browser is going to be the one that decides weither to enforce it or not.

When they say don't use Click here in a hyperlink, they aren't saying 'don't do it, it's against standards'. There simply saying that to attract more people to the link phrase it right. They just are suggesting to us that people generally are more attracted to links that say something about the topic it's being linked to.

[Scott]

http://www.w3.org/QA/Tips/noClickHere

What does the URL say up there? I see Tips.

[Scott]

And who really cares if they Guy exists? What will happen if he dosen't? What if he is just made up? Would I or other webmasters that I know care? No. We still have our languages, just the guy we thought created them dosen't exists.

Hell if I was that guy I wouldn't want to 'exists' either.

[jfuenchem]

Yes, but you SOUND pro-W3C, and I respect your opinion. Right, but they WANT to be able to force me to meet their standards. The standards will (hopefully) never be madnatory, but the W3C WANTS them to be. About the "click here" thing, that is right, but why would they waste their time worrying about using "click here" for link text when they have more improtant things to do? They are trying to take away the freedoms of webmasters. You're right about the "tips" thing. It is true that they are not true W3C standards, but they ACT as standards. The W3C would lose a lot of trust if the public somehow got word that this guy didn't exist. No one would trust the W3C. And I don't blame you: if I were him, I wouldn't want to "exist" either. Who would want to be the director of the world's most stupid organization?

[Steve]

you have taken the "click here" http://www.w3.org/QA/Tips/noClickHere thing way out of context. its simple usability advice / common sense, nothing more, nothing less.

having "click here" is not against any standards! hence this page > http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=ht...%2FnoClickHere


read the rest of the page e.g.

"we do not recommend putting verb phrases in link text"

so by this you would say the w3c will not allow verb phrases in link text?!? of course not, but it's the same thing.

Originally posted by jfuenchem
Is it just me or is everyone here pro-W3C? I have taken this issue to other forums and have received a lot of support. This forum is so far the most "hostile". I know that you are all probably just neutral, but it seems as if you are all pro-W3C.

the thing about forums is they are here for discussion, if you think someone's opinion that is different is 'hostile' then so be it, but get real if you think everyone will agree and have the same opinion as you

information is restricted without standards and guides. i believe everyone has an equal right to freedom of information

[jfuenchem]

It is true that they are not true W3C standards, but they ACT as standards. About forums, I don't mean "hostile" to me, I meant that I've gotten more arguments at this forum than any other forum. I certainly don't expect everyone to agree with my opinions, but I have gotten lots of support from people at other forums. Even though you are not really pro-W3C, you guys are certainly the most pro-W3C prople I've seen. I originally intended to spread the word about my site, not start a huge discussion. I expected some argument, but not this much.

[Steve]

hehe come on this is not an argument

discussion is great, and surley this is spredding the word about your site more you certainly got my interest and i've been checking up on related topics for the past hour.

cheers for bringing it up as i've never come across it before.

[Steve]

oh here's Sir Timothy Berners-Lee's Biography

I can’t find a single person who has met Tim Berners-Lee

seeing as he is a 'sir' at the very least the Queen of England has met him He was knighted by H.M. the Queen on 16th July, 2004

[Hellfighter]

i read it mostly never heard of them till i seen this thread, i really don't care at all about the W3C at all. and i did read what was posted on that site personally i use "Click-here" a lot i see no reason they would ask it to be blocked at all. i really think it some old guy around 90yrs old have no then better to do but to bug people, hell i would hide to if i was him. it all trash to me.