|
|
Posted by Spex on 09/25/06 14:28
Jukka Aho wrote:
> Spex wrote:
>
>>> <http://www.w3.org/WAI/>
>
>> The above site is an utter joke.
>
> You are entitled to your opinion, but note that W3C is the organization
> that defines and sets the Web standards. The official specifications for
> HTML and CSS are their doing, for example. If there is a standards
> organization for the World Wide Web, W3C is that organization. (How much
> power W3C has over individual brower implementations or websites is
> another matter, of course.)
>
The big problem is the internet is "new media" by definition and while
it requires rules for us to be able to make sense of the content how far
does one go? The beauty of the internet someone can publish work
exactly how they want to and this should be encouraged rather than
curtailed. If that means there are crap sites out there then so be it.
It will essentially regulate itself as the better sites gain visitors
and those that don't will cease to be visited and linked to. Dropping
out of search engines never to be seen.
The political correctness of our time can do as much harm as good. I am
personally anti inflicting the wishes of the few to the detriment of the
majority. This is my reason for insisting that it should be operating
systems that deal directly with needs of the handicapped user. I think
it is patronising to produce content for the handicapped. Handicapped
people are often fiercely opposed to this approach and would prefer to
have the tools to help experience the world as we do. We should be
pushing the main operating system manufacturers to better develop
accessibility tools and input devices that best help the user's disability.
In terms of the web developer developing write once read anywhere pages
is a laudable aim. Sit down and consider all of the many varied modes
of reception and you'll soon realise that in practice it is most
improbable time and money would spent to ensure mobile phone viewers
have a similar experience to a group watching on a projected display. I
was the European webmaster of a large organisation when XML was being
touted as the one stop shop for page mark up. We were imagining
effectively creating all of our electronic communications once and
deploying them in a myriad of different ways. While in theory it was
possible the practicalities were somewhat different. The tools for
producing and reading content never turned up. How long was it before
browsers could read RSS feeds a simple use of XML?
What ticks me off is the insinuation that as a web developer one is
somehow a poor developer or at least not a good one if one doesn't cover
all bases no matter how diverse and marginal they might be. Come into
the real world.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|