what a difference a day makes
what a difference a day makes. one day it's summer, and the next day it's fall. one day my alice has 159 "validation errors", and the next day none at all... if anyone needs a copy of my .html alice that will pass the validator, request it backchannel. i can generate it with the flip of a few switches in my conversion routine, so it's really no trouble. i understand the need for project gutenberg to require "validation" to ensure _some_ kind of "minimum standard" from the files they get from a multitude of different sources. so i understand if some of you out there would care about that... but from my standpoint, the preoccupation with "passing" the "validator" that some people have is just another "small behavior modification" ritual the technoids require if you wanna be in their cult. and ya know what? i ain't interested in joining. i will continue to be far more concerned with how well the e-book works for the end-user, rather than the "political correctness" of the markup, and whether i might've "sinned" by "abusing" some tag to get a desired effect... in the meantime, it certainly is entertaining to see how worked up some people can get when you use an [i] tag instead of an [em]. :+) it throws them into a _tizzy_, it does, and when you toss in a couple [br /] tags too, they get so agitated it becomes a frenzy. it is a triumph of power-struggle ("you must do it so") over functionality. (does this code do what it should?) -bowerbird
Bowerbird@aol.com wrote:
one day my alice has 159 "validation errors", and the next day none at all...
One day BB shouts:
i don't give a whit about validation. my conversion routines will _not_ give .html that passes the validator. and that's a conscious decision.
... and the next day he goes all soft and meek. You should eat some meat now and then. Only pudding rottens your innards. Then such things happen.
if anyone needs a copy of my .html alice that will pass the validator, request it backchannel.
Aaaaaah. But you were just bluffing! Your `validating' html is so ugly you are still ashamed to post it.
i can generate it with the flip of a few switches in my conversion routine, so it's really no trouble.
So there is a switch in your software that says: Generate invalid code? (Y/n) :
but from my standpoint, the preoccupation with "passing" the "validator" that some people have is just another "small behavior modification" ritual the technoids require if you wanna be in their cult. and ya know what? i ain't interested in joining.
Then why did you fix your code? -- Marcello Perathoner webmaster@gutenberg.org
And how well DOES your software work for the end user, if he is a blind person who gets crap instead of content when his screenreader is processing your files? On 9/21/05, Bowerbird@aol.com <Bowerbird@aol.com> wrote:
but from my standpoint, the preoccupation with "passing" the "validator" that some people have is just another "small behavior modification" ritual the technoids require if you wanna be in their cult.
and ya know what? i ain't interested in joining.
i will continue to be far more concerned with how well the e-book works for the end-user, rather than the "political correctness" of the markup, and whether i might've "sinned" by "abusing" some tag to get a desired effect...
-bowerbird
_______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/listinfo.cgi/gutvol-d
Bowerbird@aol.com wrote:
what a difference a day makes.
one day it's summer, and the next day it's fall.
one day my alice has 159 "validation errors", and the next day none at all...
if anyone needs a copy of my .html alice that will pass the validator, request it backchannel. i can generate it with the flip of a few switches in my conversion routine, so it's really no trouble.
I would appreciate a copy of your validated Alice .html file, as your non-validating file is completely unusable in my user agent.
participants (4)
-
Bowerbird＠aol.com -
Joey Smith -
Marcello Perathoner -
Melissa Er-Raqabi