On Sat, Nov 26, 2005 at 07:32:58PM -0600, J Moore wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 27, 2005 at 01:21:47AM +0100, the unit calling itself frantisek
> holop wrote:
>
> > and i have a feeling they don't agree that openbsd must have
> > debian-ugly pages made by c hackers in 1995 who hate html
> > and think "des
>3) Write it for an older release
[...]
> 4) Publish it, let it rot.
amen to that.
This message is essentially amplifying what Nick says, so please feel
free to skip if documentation is not your thing.
I may be somewhat biased, but looking at what google serves up for the
keywords "OpenBSD fire
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.ze
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
On Sun, Nov 27, 2005 at 05:18:40PM +0100, Hannah Schroeter wrote:
>
> >I know, it's personal site (well, just splash at this moment), and I
> >decided for 1024x768.
>
> Deciding for *any* resolution is *bad* "design".
>
Agree with that.
Craig.
On Sat, Nov 26, 2005 at 09:16:17PM -0700, Darrin Chandler wrote:
> frantisek holop wrote:
>
> >Nick's hate against pdf clouds his reason apparently.
> >pdf is a perfect format for technical documentation and
> >papers. go and shout at people who publish their paper
> >in .ps and .pdf . having sa
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Nov 27, 2005, at 7:52 PM, Jeremy David wrote:
On 11/27/05, Simon Morgan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hackers like interesting problems. Pretty HTML and a nice website
layout is not an interesting problem. Stop wasting peoples time
with it. The w
On 11/27/05, Simon Morgan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hackers like interesting problems. Pretty HTML and a nice website
> layout is not an interesting problem. Stop wasting peoples time
> with it. The website has its purpose and does a perfectly good
> job of serving it.
I would have to disagr
frantisek holop obiit.org> writes:
> who decides what is idiotic? you?
What?
> yeah, and as i said, that doesn't mean it has to hurt the eye.
> making information nice and readable is not a sin.
How is it not readable already?
> pretty html and a nice website is maybe not interesting for
> _y
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Nov 27, 2005, at 4:20 PM, frantisek holop wrote:
You're not contributing anything.
if you are sent away right at the beginning, what's the point?
expressing an opinion is still a contribution. without that,
openbsd would be much poorer.
hmm, on Sun, Nov 27, 2005 at 05:34:49PM -0500, Nick Holland said that
> Rene Rivera wrote:
> > Hannah Schroeter wrote:
> ...
> >> Deciding for *any* resolution is *bad* "design".
> >
> > The current openbsd.org doesn't "work" at 640x480... Does that make it a
> > bad design? And hence should be c
hmm, on Sun, Nov 27, 2005 at 04:04:02PM +, Simon Morgan said that
> Sime Ramov coastaldisturbance.com> writes:
> > Many programmers write code and think that it's the only thing that
> > matters. Well, web site of the product is also very important.
>
> Matters to who? Idiots who can't read m
Nick Holland wrote:
Rene Rivera wrote:
Hannah Schroeter wrote:
Deciding for *any* resolution is *bad* "design".
The current openbsd.org doesn't "work" at 640x480... Does that make it a
bad design? And hence should be considered a bug to be fixed by a new
design?
So, where do you see a
Rene Rivera wrote:
> Hannah Schroeter wrote:
...
>> Deciding for *any* resolution is *bad* "design".
>
> The current openbsd.org doesn't "work" at 640x480... Does that make it a
> bad design? And hence should be considered a bug to be fixed by a new
> design?
One of our "star" platforms, Zaurus
Hannah Schroeter wrote:
On Sun, Nov 27, 2005 at 03:04:11PM +0100, Sime Ramov wrote:
On 14:55 Sun 27 Nov, frantisek holop wrote:
your page is unreadable at 800x600
I know, it's personal site (well, just splash at this moment), and I
decided for 1024x768.
Deciding for *any* resolution is
Hello!
On Sun, Nov 27, 2005 at 03:04:11PM +0100, Sime Ramov wrote:
>On 14:55 Sun 27 Nov, frantisek holop wrote:
>> your page is unreadable at 800x600
> :)
>I know, it's personal site (well, just splash at this moment), and I
>decided for 1024x768.
Deciding for *any* resolution is *bad* "design"
> css can be used with 4.01 w/o problems. and making pages
> that have css but also set things for non-css browsers (background)
> is quite normal (at least until everybody catches up in year 3014).
>
> make it at least 1998 ;-)
OpenBSD is known for it's progressive additude, if there's a new and
Sime Ramov coastaldisturbance.com> writes:
> Many programmers write code and think that it's the only thing that
> matters. Well, web site of the product is also very important.
Matters to who? Idiots who can't read man pages and are constantly
polluting this mailing list with their idiotic rambl
On 14:46 Sun 27 Nov, Simon Morgan wrote:
> time soon. I have a sneaking suspicion that the only people who
> keep raising this are "i know what's best" "HTML programmers" who
> have nothing interesting or worthwhile to contribute or discuss but
> feel the overwhelming need to nitpick, bitch and moa
Sime Ramov coastaldisturbance.com> writes:
> I agree. Just look at the code of my site, now, OpenBSD needs exactly
> that! :) No, I'm not sarcastic, I'm serious, it would match OpenBSD
> perfectly.
Can you people please shut the fuck up about the website. It's been
stated numerous times before th
On Nov 27, 2005, at 9:04 AM, Sime Ramov wrote:
On 14:55 Sun 27 Nov, frantisek holop wrote:
your page is unreadable at 800x600
:)
I know, it's personal site (well, just splash at this moment), and I
decided for 1024x768.
But I was talking about *code*. Offcourse that I would design OpenBSD
On 14:55 Sun 27 Nov, frantisek holop wrote:
> your page is unreadable at 800x600
:)
I know, it's personal site (well, just splash at this moment), and I
decided for 1024x768.
But I was talking about *code*. Offcourse that I would design OpenBSD
site totaly different... It's about code philosoph
hmm, on Sun, Nov 27, 2005 at 02:46:13PM +0100, Sime Ramov said that
> I agree. Just look at the code of my site, now, OpenBSD needs exactly
> that! :) No, I'm not sarcastic, I'm serious, it would match OpenBSD
your page is unreadable at 800x600
-f
--
he who fights & runs away will live to fight
hmm, on Sun, Nov 27, 2005 at 02:15:27PM +0100, Jonathan Glaschke said that
> XHTML 1.1 must be shipped as application/xhtml+xml. IE can't handle this
> and ask the user (or the "idiot", as you signature says ;) where to save this
> file. That's not a real problem since you can use xhtml 1.0 but t
On 14:15 Sun 27 Nov, Jonathan Glaschke wrote:
> I'm not against xhtml, but like easy things. Putting 100 divs in one
> file is no solution.
I agree. Just look at the code of my site, now, OpenBSD needs exactly
that! :) No, I'm not sarcastic, I'm serious, it would match OpenBSD
perfectly. They writ
On Sun, Nov 27, 2005 at 01:39:18PM +0100, frantisek holop wrote:
> hmm, on Sun, Nov 27, 2005 at 10:29:27AM +0100, Jonathan Glaschke said that
> > The Web is against good design. You can see this by looking at the most
> > people's choice of browser. Bad web browsers are the biggest problem in
> >
hmm, on Sun, Nov 27, 2005 at 10:29:27AM +0100, Jonathan Glaschke said that
> The Web is against good design. You can see this by looking at the most
> people's choice of browser. Bad web browsers are the biggest problem in
> creating a good looking website. I now nobody using CSS who takes care
On Sun, Nov 27, 2005 at 01:21:47AM +0100, frantisek holop wrote:
> what a beautiful argument. is css complex for you? am truly sorry for
that.
>
> everybody knows that openbsd is famous for its code quality.
> does that mean that their pages must be ugly? of course not.
> sometimes it almost loo
On 11/26/05, Darrin Chandler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I wouldn't presume to speak for Mr. Holland, of course. But I've raised
> the pdf issue here a couple of times lately. I *don't* hate pdf. What I
> object to is inapproriate use. Why the hell would you type out a text
> document and then m
On Sat, 26 Nov 2005 21:16:17 -0700
Darrin Chandler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spake:
> frantisek holop wrote:
>
> >Nick's hate against pdf clouds his reason apparently.
> >pdf is a perfect format for technical documentation and
> >papers. go and shout at people who publish their paper
> >in .ps and .pd
frantisek holop wrote:
Nick's hate against pdf clouds his reason apparently.
pdf is a perfect format for technical documentation and
papers. go and shout at people who publish their paper
in .ps and .pdf . having said that i don't agree with
publishing _only_ in .pdf . all the formats have the
On Sun, Nov 27, 2005 at 01:21:47AM +0100, the unit calling itself frantisek
holop wrote:
> and i have a feeling they don't agree that openbsd must have
> debian-ugly pages made by c hackers in 1995 who hate html
> and think "design" is for pussies.
Ha! I like that line :) ...actually, I love it!
hmm, on Sat, Nov 26, 2005 at 01:55:33AM +0100, Emil Henry Flakk said that
> On 11/25/05, Nick Holland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This should be added to the OpenBSD FAQ ASAP.
not it shouldn't. and maybe tongue in cheek but quite rude.
it contains a lot of flame and Nick should at least spellc
On 11/25/05, Nick Holland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We've been seeing a curious number of people offering various kinds of
> documentation on various OpenBSD topics.
>
> Most of them are somewhere between minimally useful and outright
> destructive and foolish. I think I've seen precisely one t
On Fri, Nov 25, 2005 at 11:55:51AM -0500, Nick Holland wrote:
> We've been seeing a curious number of people offering various kinds of
> documentation on various OpenBSD topics.
>
> Most of them are somewhere between minimally useful and outright
> destructive and foolish. I think I've seen preci
J.C. Roberts wrote:
-1) Make certain you are a _CERTIFIED_ professional and make certain you
are wearing the proper safety gear before publicly stuffing your foot in
your mouth, namely, chocolate shoes and flavored socks. And of course,
warn the children not to try this at home...
LOL
good o
15) Make sure you keep moving the location of your pdf so that no-one
can find it. The more broken links google returns the better.
;)
Roy Morris wrote:
...
> Bad hair day Nick?
Not at all.
At this point in my life, any hair at all is good. If it wants to look
like I just lost a battle with a Tesla coil, that's fine by me. :)
Nick.
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
> Nick Holland
> Sent: Friday, November 25, 2005 11:56 AM
> To: misc
> Subject: HOTO Write bad documentation
>
>
> We've been seeing a curious number of people offeri
On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 18:35:17 +0100, mickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Fri, Nov 25, 2005 at 06:30:41PM +0059, Han Boetes wrote:
>> 11) Make documentation unnecesarily complicated. Obfusticate it.
>>
>> 12) Treat critique with violence and disdain.
>>
>> 13) Kick down on other peoples efforts
J.C. Roberts wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 11:55:51 -0500, Nick Holland
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>>people seem to be thrashing around on how to write bad documentation, so
>>here are some tips
>
>
> Thanks Nick!
>
> I was wondering which one of the long time folks around here would be
On Fri, Nov 25, 2005 at 06:30:41PM +0059, Han Boetes wrote:
> 11) Make documentation unnecesarily complicated. Obfusticate it.
>
> 12) Treat critique with violence and disdain.
>
> 13) Kick down on other peoples efforts rather than encourage them
> even though they are merely beginners.
my a
11) Make documentation unnecesarily complicated. Obfusticate it.
12) Treat critique with violence and disdain.
13) Kick down on other peoples efforts rather than encourage them
even though they are merely beginners.
# Han
On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 11:55:51 -0500, Nick Holland
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>people seem to be thrashing around on how to write bad documentation, so
>here are some tips
Thanks Nick!
I was wondering which one of the long time folks around here would be
the first to blow a fuse over all the "Ope
We've been seeing a curious number of people offering various kinds of
documentation on various OpenBSD topics.
Most of them are somewhere between minimally useful and outright
destructive and foolish. I think I've seen precisely one that is
looking very promising...and that was sent to me privat
45 matches
Mail list logo
