On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 16:06:47 -0700 "H. S. Teoh" <hst...@quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 05:59:08PM -0400, Nick Sabalausky wrote: > > On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 17:17:39 +0200 > > Andrej Mitrovic <andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com> wrote: > [...] > > > Now if someone would stop fiddling with the damn javascript which > > > keeps erroring out.. I'm beginning to join the Nick camp w.r.t. > > > JS. :p > > > > JavaScript is a technology (from the makers of clearly the greatest > > web browser of all time - Netscape) whose primary usage, and indeed > > killer feature, is to enable people to develop new and exciting ways > > to make the web slower, more broken, and more obnoxious than could > > ever be achieved with mere HTML/CSS alone. This, of course, is a > > major win for humanity in general, and is something we can all be > > proud of. > > > > http://semitwist.com/articles/article/view/my-awesome-web-development-game > > I'm guilty of turning <i> into <em>, actually. You may shoot me now. > Heh, yea, I've actually done it too (in hand-written HTML though, not mechanically). You know, just following standard recommended practices. Then it hit me: "WTF am I doing this for? My whole *intent* is for this to be bold/italic, why am I beating around the bush? Just use <b>/<i> and be done with it, Nick!" Now my posts are filled with <b> and <i> tags, and maybe it's just my hunger for rebelling, but I've never had a problem with it and I couldn't be happier :) > (Actually, I resisted many attempts at introducing bold and italics > buttons on my web-based editing page. I even introduced a way of > indicating which table cells are headers, so that styling will work > properly instead of half-assed manual bolding. But no, the users > clamored for bold and italics until they threatened to mob me (ok, > that last part may be an exaggeration), and so the horrible > bold/italics buttons appeared. So far, I've resisted adding a "red" > button (apparently, bold and italics aren't enough, sometimes you want > something in RED too). I managed to evade that one by having a select > box for the status field of the items, one option of which is styled > red, and insisting that's the only place red is allowed. We'll see how > long I hold out on that one.) > Yea, there's certainly benefits to semantic tagging, but I think it's become too religious and under-pragmatic. I would draw the line at "I want blinking/scrolling text" though ;)