Here's an example of what I'm talking about. http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fopenbsd.org%2F&charset=%28dete ct+automatically%29&doctype=Inli
Openbsd.org is built on invalid, broken code. If you would like to know why web standards are important, you could read these http://www.zeldman.com/dwws/ http://www.webstandards.org/about/ On 11/28/05, Jeremy David <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 11/27/05, David Ulevitch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > On Nov 27, 2005, at 7:52 PM, Jeremy David wrote: > > > > > Right now, OpenBSD.org's layout and design relies on a lot of old > > > hacks, > > > which break down for many users. I find that unacceptable, just as > > > I find > > > the general attitude that something is good enough when it clearly > > > could be > > > better with a little effort to be unacceptable. > > > > You're giving a matter of opinion as fact. Some of us find the > > documentation, man pages and faq, to be refreshingly simple, clear > > and concise. > > > No. It's actually fact. It works for you and that's great. It works for me > too. But because the HTML code is admittedly non-standard, the web-pages > simply don't work for some people on some systems. > > I find the content of openbsd.org to be superb. However, the way it is > delivered could be made to be functional and accessible for everyone, > including people using computer systems and browsers you've never heard of, > and the blind. > > - Jeremy > > P.S. Most people think that the web-site could look more snazzy. The idea > that it doesn't look sharp is somewhere between opinion and fact, but that's > really not what I'm talking about here. I'm talking about using valid XHTML > and CSS to make valid code that can work for everyone. > > ( But would it really hurt so bad if it looked impressive too? )
