molly.com
Thursday 18 October 2007
Standards Needs and Wants
What do you need and want from Web Standards?
- I want generated content
- I want CSS3 features, especially design-oriented techniques such as better flow and layout, multiple background graphics, etc.
- I want to rebuild the Web
Rebuilding the Web would be a very sexy pipe dream from which we all woke up with cream in our respective jeans.
I’m hoping CSS3 is more sexy. I kinda think it offers us a lot.
Part of my role is to ask and to translate the collective concerns to organizations that need to hear (and most importantly, understand) your needs. I personally don’t know what is “correct” or “right” really. So, I’m asking. And I’ll keep asking, and hopefully our voices will have some impact. I believe they can, and ultimately will.
Would readers be so kind as to tell me what your role is (designer/developer/implementor/other) in your answer as that will help me understand the context of your responses?
Filed under: general
Posted by: Molly | 22:16 | Comments (54)
Comments (54)
My role? I’m the senior designer at the company I work for. I’m also the company “web technology evangelist”.
I definitely want CSS3 features implemented. Multiple background images, multi-columns and more are highly desirable.
But more importantly, I want consistency once its implemented. I’m to the point where I can get stuff rendering pretty closely in the IE6/7, Firefox, Safari and Opera with a little tweaking here and there… but my coworkers aren’t. Some of our programmers hate CSS because of what can only be described as “unpredictability” by them.
It’s no wonder that people who don’t get it, hang on to table-based layouts for dear life.
I would really love vector images in web design. We have vector images elsewhere in design, why not web design? I’d love to have a gradient that could scale without losing quality. I would love to add in all sorts of shapes (not just rectangular). I would love imagery with a very small download. I don’t really understand why we can’t have these things, after all, we have an incredible kick arse bitmap standard (PNG) that works gloriously. Won’t someone please think of the vector graphics!!!
Role: student/designery type person.
@Molly: What do you mean by rebuild? Are you referring to the content or the underlying technologies?
The one and only thing that I want for webstandards, is consistent crosss browser behaviour.
I want beautiful, anti-aliased vector and 3D graphics – and I want accessibility too.
I want built-in rich semantics – but I want the page to be really easy to author too.
I want the easiness of writing an XHTML parser – but I don’t want to lock those people out who don’t encode ampersands right.
I don’t want to have to think about hasLayout, conditional comments, IE display bugs or “ActiveXObject”. In fact, for most things, I’ve stopped thinking about those. If people don’t use good browsers, I’m becoming zen enough to realise it’s not necessarily my problem.
I want all my gadgets and toys to talk to the Web in a meaningful way – and I want the Web to talk back.
I want to take all the data I put up on websites and be able to download it all in a big file and store it for my own personal use.
I want markup and style languages simple enough that my parent’s can produce a website without having to pay FrontPage hucksters – but well-specified enough that I don’t throw up my hands in despair when trying to implement something.
I want doing it right to become as easy for people as doing it the easy way. Accessibility, descriptive markup, separation of style, content and behaviour – these need to become as easy as ‘the easy way’.
I want to spend less time worrying about standards bodies and more time on my patio, in the sunshine, enjoying a tall, cool glass of something cold and intoxicating and being content with the world. We’re not here on earth to argue with one another on mailing lists.
My role: (Semantic) Web developer who’s waiting for the administration to end and the party to start.
My role is webdeveloper / front end architect
I WANT support for CSS3 but before that I NEED there to be consistent support for CSS2 (and even 1) from the browsers. I also DON’T WANT to have to wait for years on end for browsers to actually support CSS3 – that’s like offering me beer and then pouring it over my head.
I WANT everyone in the industry to use best practise and give half a feck about accessibility.
I WANT people to understand exactly what we do in our jobs.
I WANT good beer served in pubs at a reasonable price but at the moment I really NEED to not be thinking about things like that (am rather hung-over/still tipsy)
Ross Boozeniges – Front end web dev
Microsoft doesn’t care about the users or the web at large anyway, so why bother? I’ve given up on them entirely. Hope for smarts in that company has been proven bleak time and time again.
Let’s put our money on getting designers into the Mozilla Foundation and spreading the opensource versions of Safari wider. In my experience no browser currently matches Safari 3 in quality of use (discounting the fact that I sometimes have to click 180 times to send a Gmail message).
With Safari 3 I’ve seen what CSS3 can be. As soon as I do something nice for the user, some Windows IE user comes along and it doesn’t work, so – cat and mouse forever I believe.
Role: Web developer – front and back-end at Noush Skaugen Entertainment.
I’m both a front end and a back end developer. I want CSS3 layouts and background images and general juiciness. It goes without saying that I want cross-browser consistency – that’s what everyone in the whole world needs, whether they realise it or not 🙂
I think the CSS3 ‘clear-after’ property would be extremely useful as a tempory solution until we get the advanced layout module.
It’s a CSS3 working draft that would make the clear-fix/zoom:1 workaround obsolete. I use this all the time, it makes the pure css layouts much easier and versatile.
Of course multiple backgrounds would be good for rounded corners etc.
I’m a hybrid designer/developer.
interesting the zoom issue comes up a lot. I might be way off base, but it appears to me that accessibility features should be written into the surface of our OS’s/User Agents.
Zoom, as introduced by Opera Software and now implemented and being advanced by Microsoft is a precise example of that.
I’m not saying that designers and developers shouldn’t know Accessibility techniques, but frankly, I think we just need better tooling in our browsers and OS’s.
But that’s just me.
Hi Molly,
I have to come down on consistent support for CSS2 before all else. It’s not sexy at first glance, but if it’s a choice between rounded corners, SVG and multiple background images in some browsers, or more time spent creating great user experiences in all browsers, I’ll take the latter and cream my jeans quite happily.
Here’s a radical idea: As a movement, why don’t we campaign for a phoenix event; a moment where the Web can rise from the ashes of the browser wars with a single, easily implemented CSS filter that allows:
1. Browser developers to worry less about backwards compatibility and work together with standards bodies to agree a common approach and all implement CSS2 (or even 2.1 / 3) consistently in the next version.
2. Web developers to filter (if they choose) all legacy browser versions, serving pure semantic HTML to them, and reserving the richer, CSS-presented interfaces for new browsers.
3. Audiences–most importantly–to enjoy a better, more accessible, more joyful and fulfilling experience because we all, as front-end creatives, can spend more time per project working on how to delight and serve them rather than the user agents they might be using.
Pie in the sky, perhaps, and bereft with complex problems like legacy OS not supporting newer browsers, but just imagine what we could achieve if the limitations that have become a part of our everyday working lives were removed.
I want the server-side vendors to get clued up on web standards. I want it to be their default state.
I want .net to stop surrounding entire pages in a form element. I want them to use proper HREFs, not javascript pseudo-links.
I want commercial CMS vendors to supply valid, accessible templates by default, instead of copping out with “yeah, our defaults aren’t, but you can make your own accessible templates”.
I want their admin interfaces to be valid, accessible and easy to use. I want them to use *much* simpler WYSIWYG editors that don’t fsck up my pages.
I want their modules/components/plug-ins to use semantic HTML with a decent set of class/id elements that I can hook into with my CSS, rather than nesting tables left right and centre. I want their javascript to be unobtrusive and work across multiple browsers.
Speaking of browsers, I want reliable CSS2 across the lot of them and a nice sprinking of CSS3 features. I want @font-face. I want *much* faster and more consistent javascript engines (especially from IE.next). I want Web Forms 2.0. I want the video element (and it’s audio counterpart).
I want better support for handheld CSS media on mobile browsers.
I’d quite like a shiny red Ducati Desmosedici RR too, but you can’t have everything 😉
@Molly – I think in this context they’re using zoom:1 in their CSS as a way to force hasLayout in IE, rather than as an accessibility feature.
Oh, I’m a front-end web monkey.
I’m a front end developer.
I want it to stop being hard to put together a simple three column layout.
I want to be able to position things vertically just as easily I can I position them horizontally.
I want multiple background images to be supported in all browsers (that would make things like rounded corners and removing non-semantic markup much easier).
I want there to be fewer weird layout bugs in IE that takes hours of my time.
I want to be able to report the issues I find in IE somewhere so that some day they can be fixed just like when I find an issue with mozilla or safari.
I want to be able to seriously be able to argue that the web is a good platform for application development with my desktop developer friends.
@Kat & Tom Morris
If you’d like to play with vector graphics in site design today, I would recommend installing Opera 9.5 alpha (beta coming soon I hear), since it supports SVG files as background image in CSS. Allows for gradient backgrounds, and anything else you can do with SVG. As a bonus, Opera on the Wii supports it too.
Don’t know when other browser plan on implementing SVG in CSS, but I think the Webkit people are planning to. I’d love to see more support, because it allows for all sorts of things.
I’d like to see consistency across browsers and a method for setting font sizes in an accessible way that doesn’t mean dealing with compounding effects. I’d like to stop having to deal with IE6s stupidity but I know I’m still going to be dealing with it for the next 14 years. People seem more open to upgrading software they actually have to pay for than free stuff!
Roles: designer and developer.
Cross-browser consistency for CSS 2 would be a good start, and consistent support for CSS 3 would make me Very Happy. And it would be great if all IE 6 users could be forced to upgrade to IE 7.
I’m a graphic designer/front-end developer.
I’m a systems architect, but mostly a front-end developer and standards dork. I want a cookie and a coke. I want consistent and complete CSS3 selectors implementations, ditto for multiple backgrounds, border images and advanced layout. I want to reeeeally divorce presentation from content and not just talk about it or work around it.
Oh yeah, and don’t forget the cookie and a coke.
Hi Molly,
I’m a “Systems Engineer” but my companies unofficial “Interactive Designer.” (I write CSS and JavaScript on top of semantic HTML in functional prototypes so that the non-designers can make them dynamic with server-side scripting.)
I’d love Firebug for IE, being able to “see” the box model, currently applied CSS rules, and every AJAX request and response is amazingly helpful. In-browser profiling and debugging saves me hours of work. But if I can’t have that, how about a JavaScript error window that tells me a little more than a line number?
Of course I’d love to see CSS3 even more, but on top of that I’d also love to see people use browsers that support it. Firefox updates whether I want it to or not; it just tells me I’ve been updated, it doesn’t ask me if I want to update. It kills me that I have to support IE6 through 2010 (or longer) when there are amazing things happening in Firefox and Safari now. I know people who refuse to update to IE7 because they don’t like the window chrome; make it look like IE6 as an option (or default) or just push an update to IE6’s engine to do things right.
I’m a frontend code monkey…
Need: consistent rendering across desktop browsers for currently-supported CSS.
Want: complete CSS2 and CSS3 support. See also: What I want from a new markup spec 😉
Wouldn’t mind: all mobile browsers to honour media=”handheld”.
Hmm, make that…
Need: consistent rendering across desktop browsers for currently-supported CSS and all future CSS.
Here’s my actual response, Molly:
I’m web developer.
For now, these shouldn’t be too much to ask for:
– Generated content
– CSS3 selectors
– SVG support (this means in CSS too!)
For the future:
– Rounded corners
– Multiple backgrounds
– Web fonts
– CSS Grid Positioning
– CSS Advanced Layout Module
I’m a Content Manager, budding designer and budding front end developer.
I want support across all browser to be consistent. Not just all new browsers. If something in IE 7 fixed some issues in IE 6, then I want IE 6 to be without those issues. I want to write my first css draft ONCE and know that it will render the same across all platforms. I don’t want to open 5 different browsers and see it render similarly in 3, differently in the 4th and even more wildly in the 5th. (guess which don’t play nice?)
I would love to have all sorts of cool features and grids and layout options and fancy stuff. I really would. However, what I care most about is efficiency and that is sorely lacking due to having to fix the quirks across browsers when styling with css. I DON’T WANT TABLE LAYOUTS, so I struggle on because I really do love the possibilities with CSS.
I’m a front-end designer/developer and recent CSS convert. After spending the last eight years in WYSIWYG darkness, I’ve been led into the glorious light of semantic mark-up.
I want what everyone else before me has said (except for maybe the cookie and coke…ewww), but mostly, I want to be able to understand what the hell all these freaking buzzwords actually mean.
I know it’s incumbent upon me to get up to speed on what I’ve missed out on, but couldn’t CSS itself be a little easier, a little less “codey?” (there’s that word again, Mol…)
I realize that with any programming there has to be syntax, but just as we’re striving to make mark-up more semantic, more understandable, could we not also make the nuances of CSS’s learning curve be a little less daunting?
Why can’t there be a truly effective WYSIWYG-style web authoring application that forces the use of proper semantic HTML and CSS, but doesn’t require one to know where to drop in an empty “clear” to make a footer work in a 3-column layout?
I guess what I’m asking for is a means to design completely visually, using CSS instead of tables, without all the hacks and fixes that have to be applied manually. Is that a pipe dream? Should I be strung up by my thumbs for still wanting to do it “the easy way?”
I understand the evils of table-based layout and have become a true CSS believer; this old dog will indeed learn whatever new tricks are required to do and to excel in his profession. It would just be nice if the spirit of what WYSIWYG layout originally sought to be could be re-addressed and really be done right this time.
@Kevin – CSS3 Selectors FTW!
No official title (unless you count “home renovator”?) but I’m working on a couple of web-based projects.
Here’s what I’d like to see: specific examples in the “official” documentation. That way there can be no doubt about how something should work. Pictures and explanatory texts, please!
@Olly: I have a shiny red Ducati Monster (S2R). Does that count? 🙂
Carolyn Ann
Job: Project and team management of specialized Intranets and closed Internets with focus on the targeted market. Am not a designer nor developer however I do spend considerable time in understanding/learning the methods and technologies that are required to develop a finished product.
Mantra: It is not how much time, effort nor money that a developer/designer puts into a technology, product or communication vehicle that creates value. It is what the targeted market and end-user determines and considers to be of value. Anything else is pure bullshit.
General Wish List:
1. The geek tail stop trying to wag the communication dog.
2. Standards and standards fanatics: Get real, get practical and get a life.
3. Technology development and finished product: Test, test, test and test again. Take a lesson from NASA. Design, develop and implement as though you have tens of thousand of tons of thrust strapped to your ass. If it fails, you are barbecued.
4. Technologies: Genuine hard core two factor authentication built into hardware and operating systems. True interoperability and usability that includes device independence.
Role: Frontend developer – (X)HTML, CSS, Javascript working within JSP, JSF, Ruby on Rails, PHP. I can get around some in the backend, but much prefer the user experience side. I love tying it all together.
It seems like there are a lot of things that require hackerific solutions in order to remain standards compliant and accessible.
The primary pain points from my perspective have been:
1) How incredibly slow advances are to become reality. Some of below would be moot if things like CSS3 would actually become reality.
2) Forms. Wow, what a pain it is to layout complex forms semantically. I love all of the extremely simple “examples” (Not in my real-world life!) of how to layout forms on the web. Not to mention the many differences across user agents. I’d like to see more well defined standards surrounding this so we can eventually get to a more, uh, standard experience.
File upload could certainly benefit from a little focus! I can’t believe it’s 2007 and you can still only natively upload one lousy file at a time. I don’t want to use ActiveX, Java, or some other crap to make a better user experience for something like uploading multiple images.
3) Basic layout. It shouldn’t be so difficult to mimick a 1994 table layout. Creating image backgrounds and other such crap to make a layouts “appear” uniform, is well, crap. I feel like floats were intentioned to be used for elements to behave like 1994 images – so content would flow around them – not to create overall layout frameworks. Sure, go ahead and point me to some extremely simple example of a basic 2 or 3 column CSS layout. My point is it doesn’t feel like, to me, that floats are actually being used as they were intentioned.
I work with mostly dynamic content of varying lengths and widths, which makes it much more complicated – static content is easy. Sure, it’s nice that things automatically float down when content becomes too wide in a neighboring block, but that’s not always desirable. There are instances where I’d prefer to keep the content relationships in tact, which is laughably simple using tables.
No, I don’t use table layouts… I put up with all the hassles to make the content more accessible, because after all, that’s what it’s all about – the content.
4) AJAX. Yeah, regardless of whether you love it or hate it, it’s here to stay… until something better comes along. For the love of God, could the browser makers PLEASE just deal with the back button problems so we don’t have to do so much work on our end! Most developers don’t bother to invest the time, or don’t have the knowledge to fix it so it just ends up a poor user experience.
5) Yes, multiple background images! That would make life sooo much better for more involved designs. I hate having to add useless containers to achieve some visual effects.
Something I’ve thought about, but can’t decide whether it’s a good or bad idea, is if there were some standards around some of the user interactions for browser makers. An example of what I’m talking about would be the ability to drag images around to reorder them after uploading them – having native browser “draggables” could certainly make life a little easier. So basically, some of the cool DHTML stuff that’s implemented in a bunch of different ways in many different JS libraries, but slightly differently. Adding a bunch of libraries and other custom javascript is not nearly as efficient as it could be if it was part of the browser. It seems like you could make a good argument for either side of the coin – I’d be curious to see what others think.
Okay, I’ll quit rambling on 🙂
Oh, lets see:
1. All the fun CSS3 layout stuff
2. The Semantic Web, without XML, now
3. Less W3C Acronyms
4. Everyone to have read and understood the HTTP spec
5. Mobile operators with simple, affordable, data plans OR massive free wi-fi zones
6. A couple of mobile browsers to dominate the market (so I can stop shopping on ebay for as many hand helds as I can get my hands on)
7. For buyers/clients to understand what we might call professionalism, and the trade offs when making any business descision
8. Real world accessibility
9. People to stop building iphone sites and build mobile sites instead
10. Tom Morris for president
What I am? Depends on the day of the week but web technologist/consultant will do for today
1. Cross-browser consistency.
2. Stop. Confirm step 1 completed.
3. Support generated content (even just the basics), and CSS Web Fonts (@font-face).
(Also, it’s not my idea, but someone suggested that being able to clear an absolutely positioned element would solve many layout challenges.)
4. CSS Advanced Layout, Backgrounds and Borders, Generated and Replaced Content, Grid Positioning, Multi-column Layout
5. …and a print stylesheet for Molly.com
I’m a web developer (read designer who wears too many hats) in Higher Education.
My wish list:
1) Cross browser support… let me stop hacking!
2) Multiple background images, I think we all know why.
3) Allow me to embed fonts (branding is such a big part of what I do, and I hate having to create images and replacement css for what should be a simple header style.
4) I want browser vendors to FORCE people to write quality code. Evangelism sometimes isn’t enough to reach those who aren’t ready to listen.
1) CSS layout that is at least as powerful as tables for dynamic content(zealot said it well).
2) // as comment single line in css, so I can leave comments for myself explaining each line, without losing the ability to comment out an entire section when needed (something computer language designers have known about for, what, two or three decades)
3) Multiple images per element
4) More orthogonal properties with less side effects. Less of the “1st set float=left, 2nd do x, y & z to negate all the effect of float you don’t want, whoops the parent context changed so we need to redo it all”
5) Not having to reach for a book when I want to center an element.
5) divs that either shrink-to-fit there content, or expand to fit the available space, and can contain the floats inside them without needing to put in a clear.
My background is programming and backends, but I have been venturing out into design and templates for the last couple years.
I want DIVs to be able to behave like tables, so my layouts can all be 100% high. Thats what I want.
quick point: it’s not about the divs. ANY element displayed as block, should, in my opinion, be able to properly render not only a height, but an auto-stretch feature AND the ability to limit via min/max across the browser boards.
We would like proper English spelling in CSS (centre and colour, primarily) 😉
Like others, we’d like it if it didn’t take forever for standards to be implemented (in IE). It’s hard for developers to be passionate about the new developments if we know it’s going to be 5+ years before we can actually use any of it. The modular aspect of CSS 3 is a step in the right direction.
I (Megan) also agree with Olly above about third party applications not supporting standards. Even small, open source projects. If I’m looking for a third-party application the last thing I want to worry about is whether the code it outputs is standards compliant. Unfortunately, most of the time it isn’t (thankfully, we have Drupal).
@Dan – I’m a higher ed web developer too!
Maaike Says:
And it would be great if all IE 6 users could be forced to upgrade to IE 7.
Sorry, ain’t going to happen I’m afraid. I’ve personally encountered a number of cases where installing IE6 prevented a user from accessing the web. Revert back to IE6 and the problem went away.
And yes, I did dig into the issue but when the client is paying by the hour, there is only so much they will spend to get tabs and nice looking icons.
A lot of the people I see are happy with IE, don’t want to try something different like Firefox and are really quite content with what thet have. I do try to educate them, but you can only try so hard.
I work as a freelance IT consultant and I prefer clients with Macs, even if they don’t need my services as often.
– Neil.
@Thacker:
Take a lesson from NASA. Design, develop and implement as though you have tens of thousand of tons of thrust strapped to your ass. If it fails, you are barbecued.
That should be above every developer and designer’s desk the world over. Pure class. 🙂
If you’ll excuse me, I have a mess to clean up…
– Neil.
Chaos
More Chaos, like it is now but more, more faster, more variety, more conflict, more stuff.
I want a browser that is a cross between the Second Life viewer, lynx and X Windows.
I want a browser that is lean, has no email or bloat but renders the page before mouse-up. Click-read. App startup and render with 3ms latency.
I want the window border to be vector, loose the rectangle.
I want to loose all that junk at the top of the window and read full screen.
Me? I’m doing backend with raw ruby & java & c but have done front end. I’ve paced around the building with compatibility frustration, but the wild west web is not ready to settle down with perfect needlepoint rules and totally uniform standards. It’s changing too much, or should be.
Lock it down now and it’ll be many generations that loose the next great ‘OMG it does what???’
I want a web that I can’t begin to imagine.
And I want it now!!!!
I want CSS3 to specify rendering exactly. I want to know, as an implementer, exactly what my output should be, including for invalid input data. Specifications are effectively useless unless they define how they should be implemented precisely, otherwise implementations will not be interoperable.
Firstly, we need to define how to process data with what we currently have (i.e., CSS 2.1, HTML 4.01), an effort that has already started with various things beginning (i.e., HTML 5, my HTTP parsing spec, etc.).
Only once that is done, should we really start working on adding new stuff. While without question some of these things can be defined rather simply (i.e., how multiple borders is the same place should be treated), some are more difficult (i.e., rendering of |canvas|).
I want all browsers to support X3D and SVG. Natively, without plugins.
I want better support for handheld stylesheets
I want Microsoft to support the standards better or leave the game – If you can’t build a better browser, then get out of the way of those that can, like Apple, Opera and Mozilla.
[front end web developer]
I seriously hate that expression.
That aside, I’m a frontend developer and I would love to see consistency in implementation across browsers in as far as the specs provide sufficient explanation. Not the “We think we know better” stuff.
Hmm, make that…
Need: consistent rendering across desktop browsers for currently-supported CSS and all future CSS.
I’m a web designer for fun (at this point in time) and serious CSS bug hunter.
1) The next version of Internet Explorer that doesn’t have the propriety property hasLayout and one that doesn’t have a rendering engine called trident.
2) All browsers to have tools to allow users to easily resize text or turn on or off JS easily. and browsers that teach users how to use them safely.
3) For all browsers to properly adhere to CSS2 standards, one being :focus for such simple site accessibility.
4) And CSS3 for the beautiful, stylish and symantic web of the future.
So this is basically your list in reversed.
To add to my previous message (the one above)
2 3/4) For all browsers to properly adhere to CSS1 standards. Some of these standards which even IE7 does not support. Please see this testcase.
IE Float model and the reality
Such a simple children story book type layout can not be done in IE.
BTW, I glad I don’t where jeans to bed.
Pingback: CSS3 Standards Needs & Wants | Pixel Bliss - web & graphics design, digital arts & communication, lifehacks, getting things done, personal productivity
Rollo: Frontend developer – (X)HTML, CSS, Javascript working within JSP, JSF, Ruby on Rails, PHP. I can get around some in the backend, but much prefer the user experience side. I love tying it all together.
It seems like there are a lot of things that require hackerific solutions in order to remain standards compliant and accessible
I’d just like an opportunity to use modern Web standards. I’m afraid I’m stuck in table layout, font tag hell.
The most positive effect of sticking to web-standarts, valid webdesign before all is the strict disjunction of layout and content.
In an ideal case each tag in the webdesign has only a semantic, no layout meaning. By changing the CSS-file into another CSS the whole design of the website can be changed without touching the actual code.
I want …
… to change the the w3c REC status in a w3c CONDITION status, giving w3c the power to turn off the light for pages which are not compatible.
… browsers turning to black, and giving an alert “Fixed font-size discovered. Please contact the webmaster”.
… browsers turning to black, and giving an alert “Tables for lay out discovered. Please contact the webmaster”.
… browsers turning to black, and giving an alert “Page is not HTML-valid. Please contact the webmaster”.
… browsers turning to black, and giving an alert “Page is not CSS-valid. Please contact the webmaster”.
… browsers turning to black, and giving an alert “Page is not WCAG-AAA valid. Please contact the webmaster”.
… browsers turning to black, and giving an alert “Page has no liquid design. Please contact the webmaster”.
… to invite all webdesigners worldwide for a big party at the day we can celebrate that PIE (positioniseverything.net) has been superfluous.
… to have a blacklist of webdesigners, html-editors, CMS-developers, books and courses fooling their customers/students with not standards compliable and not accessible and/or not user friendly products (euh, pretty long list? ;-).
So I agree: I want to rebuild the web too.
Maybe we can define “Web3 – keep it cool”, start from scratch, and throw all other things into the Wayback Machine? Should give some more bandwith and less energy consumption too!
But who am I?
Just an autodidact designer/developer/webmaster, 1 voice in the world population, and not enough money to buy MS and some others. Suppose others are in comparable circumstances, but together…
(btw: while busy to get a real world website fitting my conditions, no time left to get my homepage 100%)
Newer Comments →