On 11/28/05, Jason Dixon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I assume it's because Nick is a VOLUNTEER that spends an unlimited > amount of time keeping the site updated with CONTENT. He knows that > no matter what design changes he wishes to make will undoubtedly be > shot down by Theo since the site is already FUNCTIONAL and meets the > goals of the project.
Well, simply as a matter of fact, it's actually untrue that the site is functional. Functional for you? Maybe. For everyone? Not exactly. Check this out: http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.openbsd.org&charset=%28det ect+automatically%29& There are 5 errors on the main page alone. That means that no matter how useful the content on the website is, the code breaks down for a lot of people. Standards are important. Where HTML is concerned, they're doubly so, because there are so many different clients (browsers) being used by so many different kinds of people. http://www.webstandards.org/about/ http://www.zeldman.com/dwws/ I'm really underwhelmed by comments like "Why don't you cut the guy some slack" and "I don't speak for Nick, but I imagine he probably feels a unappreciated when folks feel like nitpicking his "design"" Excusing errors in the interests of not hurting someone's feelings is a great way to end up with a third-rate product. The website is hacky, invalid, and broken. Not to mention the fact that most people think it's ugly. If that hurts someone's feelings then I'm sorry, but it does no one any favors to ignore errors and broken code. If no one is in charge of making sure that the site is good, then someone should be in charge of that. - Jeremy -- > Jason Dixon > DixonGroup Consulting > http://www.dixongroup.net
