Which Browsers? -- compliance and accessibility in engaging websites
Davide Montellanico
dull and boring?
Some people in ADG think about accessibility and standards as useless goals
and limitations for achieving a visual engaging website.
The link above proves they are completely wrong!
Onideus Mad Hatter
...I'm not sure I understand what you're saying...I'm not sure YOU
understand what you're saying. If you're claiming that it's W3C
compliant and therefore more accessible...well you're wrong on both
counts. W3C validation most certainly DOES NOT equate to cross
browser compatibility and actually, a lot of times conforming to W3C
specs will CAUSE compatibility issues, rather than solve them. And
you would be wrong on the other count in that several of his pages DO
NOT meet W3C RECOMMENDATIONS. Remember kids, the W3C only RECOMMENDS
standards, they do not ACTUALLY set standards. That last point can be
a REAL bitch for a lot of people to wrap their fat lil heads around.
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm น x น
http://www.backwater-productions.net
http://www.backwater-productions.net/hatter-blog
Hatter Quotes
-------------
"I'm not a professional, I'm an artist."
"The more I learn the more I'm killing my idols."
"Is it wrong to incur and then use the hate ridden, vengeful stupidity
of complete strangers in random Usenet froups to further my art?"
"Freedom is only a concept, like race it's merely a social construct
that doesn't really exist outside of your ability to convince others
of its relevancy."
"Next time slow up a lil, then maybe you won't jump the gun and start
creamin yer panties before it's time to pop the champagne proper."
"Reality is directly proportionate to how creative you are."
"People are pretty fucking high on themselves if they think that
they're just born with a soul. *snicker*...yeah, like they're just
givin em out for free."
"Quible, quible said the Hare. Quite a lot of quibling...everywhere.
So the Hare took a long stare and decided at best, to leave the rest,
to their merry little mess."
"There's a difference between 'bad' and 'so earth shatteringly
horrible it makes the angels scream in terror as they violently rip
their heads off, their blood spraying into the faces of a thousand
sweet innocent horrified children, who will forever have the terrible
images burned into their tiny little minds'."
"How sad that you're such a poor judge of style that you can't even
properly gauge the artistic worth of your own efforts."
"Those who record history are those who control history."
"Is my .sig delimiter broken? Really? You're sure? Awww,
gee...that's too bad...for YOU!" `, )
Davémon
> On Thu, 13 Apr 2006 13:18:50 +0200, "Davide Montellanico"
> <lati...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>>Do you think that a compliant and accessible website has to be in any case
>>dull and boring?
>>
>>http://www.visitdeadends.com/
>>
>>Some people in ADG think about accessibility and standards as useless goals
>>and limitations for achieving a visual engaging website.
>>The link above proves they are completely wrong!
>
> ...I'm not sure I understand what you're saying...I'm not sure YOU
> understand what you're saying.
Well I understand what I think Davide is saying. And other than a couple of
validation errors on the site, I agree.
> If you're claiming that it's W3C
> compliant and therefore more accessible...well you're wrong on both
> counts. W3C validation most certainly DOES NOT equate to cross
> browser compatibility
That's very true, but accessibility doesn't equate to "cross browser
compatibility" either, and involves going an extra few yards on top of
adhering to standards:
Take a look at: http://www.w3.org/WAI/gettingstarted/Overview.html
Now, W3C compliance /would/ equate to cross-browser compatibility if the
bloody idiots that developed browsers had actually implemented the
reccommended specs.
--
Davémon
http://www.nightsoil.co.uk/
Onideus Mad Hatter
wrote:
>Onideus Mad Hatter arranged shapes to form:
>
>> On Thu, 13 Apr 2006 13:18:50 +0200, "Davide Montellanico"
>> <lati...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Do you think that a compliant and accessible website has to be in any case
>>>dull and boring?
>>>
>>>http://www.visitdeadends.com/
>>>
>>>Some people in ADG think about accessibility and standards as useless goals
>>>and limitations for achieving a visual engaging website.
>>>The link above proves they are completely wrong!
>>
>> ...I'm not sure I understand what you're saying...I'm not sure YOU
>> understand what you're saying.
>
>Well I understand what I think Davide is saying. And other than a couple of
>validation errors on the site, I agree.
>
>> If you're claiming that it's W3C
>> compliant and therefore more accessible...well you're wrong on both
>> counts. W3C validation most certainly DOES NOT equate to cross
>> browser compatibility
>
>That's very true, but accessibility doesn't equate to "cross browser
>compatibility" either, and involves going an extra few yards on top of
>adhering to standards:
...I think maybe you missed the part in my post where I explained that
THERE ARE NO STANDARDS, only RECOMMENDATIONS for standards...and
since...NO browser maker follows those recommendations to the
letter...well, there is no standard. There never WILL BE a standard
(unless you're talking about Flash). Tres simple, non?
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm ą x ą
Davide Montellanico
"Onideus Mad Hatter" <use...@backwater-productions.net> ha scritto nel
messaggio news:20it32h5djoehldgm...@4ax.com...
Sadly your world is so simple that you perceive things only in black and
white overlooking all the colours in between.
--
Davide
Fred Doyle
> ...I think maybe you missed the part in my post where I explained that
> THERE ARE NO STANDARDS, only RECOMMENDATIONS for standards...and
> since...NO browser maker follows those recommendations to the
> letter...well, there is no standard. There never WILL BE a standard
> (unless you're talking about Flash). Tres simple, non?
>
That's not how the w3C and most industry professionals see the w3c's role or
its recommendations. In fact, the w3c states that their recommendations
precisely ARE standards.
"The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) is an international consortium where
Member organizations, a full-time staff, and the public work together to
develop Web standards. W3C's mission is:
"To lead the World Wide Web to its full potential by developing protocols
and guidelines that ensure long-term growth for the Web.
"W3C Develops Web Standards and Guidelines
"W3C primarily pursues its mission through the creation of Web standards and
guidelines. Since 1994, W3C has published more than ninety such standards,
called W3C Recommendations."
You may not agree with them that their recommendations are standards, but
you are just playing semantics then. This is considered by most
professionals to be the standards setting body for the web. That doesn't
mean you have to follow their standards, but regardless, they still set
standards that most of us look to when evaluating our own and others' work.
You can have your own Hatter standards, and follow them or not. You can
promulgate your standards and try and get others to adopt them if you wish.
The w3c has a considerable lead on you, and their standards are accepted by
most working professionals I know. But Hatter standards would still be
standards, even if no one else adopts them. Given your god like nature, I
expect they'd be higher standards than the w3c's, maybe even unattainable by
most of us.
You can even say that for you there are no standards. You don't have to
accept that standards apply for you and your work. No one can make you
adhere to those damn w3c tyrants' standards. But standards don't have to be
enforced to be standards, they don't even have to be adhered to to be
standards. They just have to be promulgated and recognized as standards. The
more who accept them, the merrier, and the more important those standards
become.
Your concept that because no browser follows the standards 100%, there are
no standards is badly flawed logically. There are plenty of standards that
are never lived up to 100% of the time. Adherence to a standard does not
create the standard just as adherence to the rules does not create the
rules. You can't argue that there is no speed limit because no one follows
it, if you get a ticket for speeding. You can't argue that their are no web
standards for coding in the face of web standard for coding promulgated by a
standard setting body. There are no penalties for not adhering to w3c
standards, but lack of adherence doesn't prevent them from being standareds.
Hell, the Graphic Arts Guild writes a variety of standards regarding payment
of designers, working conditions for designers, contracting standards for
designers, and these are broken or ignored regularly, maybe even more often
than not.. Many think these standards are wrong or outdated and lobby for
their change. They are still standards, recognized by many pros and upheld
as standards by many in the industry.
A standard is not a rule. It is exactly what the word indicates, i.e.
something to measure against. Or not measure against, if you so choose.
IMHO, I think you are confusing stadards, rules, and enforcement.
--
Fred Doyle
Onideus Mad Hatter
wrote:
>That's not how the w3C and most industry professionals see the w3c's role or
>its recommendations.
Um, actually yeah, it is.
>In fact, the w3c states that their recommendations precisely ARE standards.
<snip>
You're missing the point kiddo. Unless those RECOMMENDED standards
are ACTUALLY being used as standards...they're not standards. I don't
know, maybe you're a lil confused on what the definition of a
"standard" is. Here, let me help educate you:
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=standards
"Something, such as a practice or a product, that is widely recognized
or employed, especially because of its excellence."
Now I suppose if you're arguing out of a corner (which you are) you
can try and quibble on which definition of "recognized" they're using
(I would tend to lean towards 6, where as I'm sure you would lean more
towards 2 no doubt):
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=recognized
Your quibbling won't hold up too well if I bother to bring up the fact
that the W3C is comprised mostly of browser and other software
manufacturers and if they really WERE trying to achieve some global
set of definitive standards...well um, why aren't they following them?
See, they've got a bit of a catch 22 goin on in their reasoning. It's
a lil asinine to be going around recommending standards when you don't
even follow them yourself.
>"The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) is an international consortium where
>Member organizations, a full-time staff, and the public work together to
>develop Web standards. W3C's mission is:
>
>"To lead the World Wide Web to its full potential by developing protocols
>and guidelines that ensure long-term growth for the Web.
>
>"W3C Develops Web Standards and Guidelines
>
>"W3C primarily pursues its mission through the creation of Web standards and
>guidelines. Since 1994, W3C has published more than ninety such standards,
>called W3C Recommendations."
You're confusing the development of standards with SETTING standards.
Anyone can develop "standards", but unless everyone ACTUALLY adheres
to them, they're only recommendations.
>You may not agree with them that their recommendations are standards, but
>you are just playing semantics then.
...actually, you're the one who is arguing semantics son...and you're
REALLY not doing a very good job of it either. I would suggest you
spend some time in Google and find all the people who are smarter than
you who have already tried to argue your failing position.
Fred Doyle
> "Something, such as a practice or a product, that is widely recognized
> or employed, especially because of its excellence."
Well, I guess that's something we'll never agree on, then. You don't see
that definintion as applying to the w3c's standards (their term , not mine),
I think it fits perfectly.
I suppose from your post that you are arguing that the w3c's standards
(their term, not mine) are not widely recognized, whether by definition #2
or definition #6 for recognized. I think that's as silly as the rest of what
follows.
--
Fred Doyle
Fred Doyle
Unabridged Dictionay's #1 definition for standard, " having the quality or
qualities of a model, guage, pattern or type..." I think that's more what
the w3c has in mind when it says it creates standards. Watch out for those
online dictionaries.
--
Fred Doyle
Onideus Mad Hatter
wrote:
>"Onideus Mad Hatter" <use...@backwater-productions.net> wrote
What I'm saying is this:
1. Some of the largest contributing bodies to the W3C are Microsoft,
Mozilla, Netscape, Macromedia, etc.
2. These are the same bodies that are MAKING THE BROWSERS.
3. NO BROWSER comes anywhere even remotely CLOSE to meeting the
recommended standards set by the W3C...set by themselves.
It's the whole, "they don't practice what they preach" kind of deal.
So you tell me, how seriously are you going to take a pastor who tells
you not to have sex when he's out on the corner of 5th and Main every
night pickin up a hooker?
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm น x น
Fred Doyle
> It's the whole, "they don't practice what they preach" kind of deal.
> So you tell me, how seriously are you going to take a pastor who tells
> you not to have sex when he's out on the corner of 5th and Main every
> night pickin up a hooker?
>
That's funny. Of all the reasons I've heard in favor of writing or buying
standard compliant code, I don't think I've ever heard anyone suggest that
you should follow standards because Microsoft, Netscape/AOL or Mozilla
preach that you should.
--
Fred Doyle
Onideus Mad Hatter
wrote:
>"Onideus Mad Hatter" <use...@backwater-productions.net> wrote
Wait, you've heard REASONS?! LOL...usually the peanut gallery starts
retarding material off the W3C because some idiot written college text
book told them it was a "good thing".
By the by, from your perspective it's not Microsoft, Netscape,
Mozilla, etc...it's the W3C whose "preaching", it's just people like
you generally tend to conveniently FORGET whose BEHIND the W3C...as
you so stupidly start regurgitating quotes that you slurped off of
their lil site as if they prove anything.
Davide Montellanico
> On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 10:33:56 GMT, "Fred Doyle" <fdo...@nycap.rr.com>
> wrote:
>
>>"Onideus Mad Hatter" <use...@backwater-productions.net> wrote
>>
>>> It's the whole, "they don't practice what they preach" kind of deal.
>>> So you tell me, how seriously are you going to take a pastor who tells
>>> you not to have sex when he's out on the corner of 5th and Main every
>>> night pickin up a hooker?
>>>
>>
>>That's funny. Of all the reasons I've heard in favor of writing or buying
>>standard compliant code, I don't think I've ever heard anyone suggest that
>>you should follow standards because Microsoft, Netscape/AOL or Mozilla
>>preach that you should.
>
> Wait, you've heard REASONS?! LOL...usually the peanut gallery starts
> retarding material off the W3C because some idiot written college text
> book told them it was a "good thing".
>
> By the by, from your perspective it's not Microsoft, Netscape,
> Mozilla, etc...it's the W3C whose "preaching", it's just people like
> you generally tend to conveniently FORGET whose BEHIND the W3C...as
> you so stupidly start regurgitating quotes that you slurped off of
> their lil site as if they prove anything.
Probably you are not aware of the fact that many web designers are playing
an important role in the definition and promotion of web standards.
The Web Standard Project is a coalition fighting for standards. Please, read
on:
http://webstandards.org/
--
Davide
> --
>
> Onideus Mad Hatter
> mhm ą x ą
Fred Doyle
> Wait, you've heard REASONS?!
Yes, many. And several made a lot of sense.
> LOL...usually the peanut gallery starts
> retarding material ...
Huh?
--
Fred Doyle
Onideus Mad Hatter
...um, well congratulations, they're a spectacular failure! Free
cl00, there ARE NO STANDARDS! LOL
And really, it doesn't matter fuck all what the web DESIGNERS want,
it's what the people who are making the BROWSERS want. If THEY don't
adhere to a specific set of standands then it REALLY doesn't matter
fuck all if any dribbling froup of spazzy lil .rotards wants to.
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm ą x ą
http://www.backwater-productions.net
http://www.backwater-productions.net/hatter-blog
Hatter Quotes
-------------
Davide Montellanico
Have good reading:
http://webstandards.org/learn/
> And really, it doesn't matter fuck all what the web DESIGNERS want,
> it's what the people who are making the BROWSERS want. If THEY don't
> adhere to a specific set of standands then it REALLY doesn't matter
> fuck all if any dribbling froup of spazzy lil .rotards wants to.
> --
>
> Onideus Mad Hatter
I'm sorry but you are wrong.
Excerpt from the webstandards.org website - source:
http://webstandards.org/learn/faq/#p211
"What is the W3C?
The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) is an international industry consortium
dedicated to "leading the Web to its full potential". It's led by Tim
Berners-Lee, the inventor of the Web. Founded in 1994, the W3C has more than
450 member organizations - including Microsoft, America Online (parent
company of Netscape Communications), Apple Computer, Adobe, Macromedia, Sun
Microsystems, and a variety of other hardware and software manufacturers,
content providers, academic institutions, and telecommunications companies.
The Consortium is hosted by three research institutions - MIT in the US,
INRIA in Europe, and Keio University in Japan.
What does it do?
The W3C develops open specifications (de facto standards) to enhance the
interoperability of web-related products. W3C Recommendations are developed
by working groups consisting of Consortium members and invited experts.
Working groups obtain general consensus from companies and other
organizations involved in creating applications for the Web, and create
Working Drafts and Proposed Recommendations. These are then submitted to the
W3C membership and director, for formal approval as W3C Recommendations.
More information regarding this process and the review stages can be
obtained from the W3C website."
--
Davide
Davide Montellanico
>
> And really, it doesn't matter fuck all what the web DESIGNERS want,
> it's what the people who are making the BROWSERS want. If THEY don't
> adhere to a specific set of standands then it REALLY doesn't matter
> fuck all if any dribbling froup of spazzy lil .rotards wants to.
In any case the URL I posted proves the contrary
http://www.visitdeadends.com/
The website was developed following standards *or you can call it W3C
raccomendations if you prefer* and it perfectly works with all the major
modern browsers. Now it's hard to prove the truth of your assumptions...
--
Davide
> --
>
> Onideus Mad Hatter
Fred Doyle
"Onideus Mad Hatter" <use...@backwater-productions.net> wrote
> ARE NO STANDARDS!
I can categorically say, with 100% certainty and without fear of effective
refutation that you are wrong, that there are standards, and that the w3c
publishes one set of them.
Fred Doyle
Ben Measures
From the "Glossary of W3C Jargon" <http://www.w3.org/2001/12/Glossary>:
> Recommendation
> A technical specification which has been endorsed by the W3C. Similar
> to what other standards organizations would call a "Standard".
Thus, a technical specification which has "W3C Recommendation" is *the*
standard.
--
Ben Measures
$email =~ s/is@silly/@/
Onideus Mad Hatter
<lati...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>works with all the major modern browsers.
Look, kid, I realize yer just a lil more than slow...I mean, yer the
one who was stealing art out of the Tao Te Ching fer christ sake, but
I'll try and hammer this into ya ONE more time...unless you can say
ALL BROWSERS EVER MADE...THERE IS NO STANDARD...now, you can say
there's a STANDARD PROTOCOL...http...in which web content is
delivered...but THERE IS NO STANDARD for displaying web content. And
no ammount of your whining and no ammount of your posting to pissy lil
organizations who spend all day long WISHING for it to happen are
gonna change the fact that THERE IS NO STANDARD. How many more times
do I gotta say it Davide? You just tell me, how many more is it gonna
take? THERE IS NO STANDARD. Write it the fuck down if you have to.
Hell, I'll go buy a box of crayons, color it the fuck out for ya and
send it to ya in the mail, how would that be? THERE IS NO STANDARD.
Is it, is it clickin yet Davide? THERE IS NO STANDARD. How about
now, startin to sink in? THERE IS NO STANDARD. You just let me know
how many more times, mmmkay?
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
Onideus Mad Hatter
>> ARE NO STANDARDS!
>I can categorically say, with 100% certa<COCK SLAP>
THERE ARE NO STANDARDS:
http://www.opera.com/docs/specs/
THERE ARE NO STANDARDS:
HTML 4.01
Opera version 8 supports HTML 4.01 with these exceptions:
Event attributes are not supported for the option element
The col width attribute does not support multilengths
The object standby and declare attributes are not supported.
The table cell attributes char and charoff are not supported.
THERE ARE NO STANDARDS:
XHTML 1.1 support
Opera version 8 supports XHTML 1.1 with these exceptions:
Event attributes are not supported for the option element
The col width attribute does not support multilengths
The object standby and declare attributes are not supported.
The table cell attributes char and charoff are not supported
Ruby annotations are not supported
THERE ARE NO STANDARDS:
CSS Level 2
Opera 8 supports all of CSS2 with the exception of:
These properties: font-size-adjust, font-stretch, marker-offset,
marks, and text-shadow,
The list style types cjk-ideographic, hebrew, hiragana,
hiragana-iroha, katakana, katakana-iroha.
These property/value combinations: "display: marker", "text-align:
<string>", "visibility: collapse".
Named pages (as described in section 13.3.2).
The "@font-face" construct.
The :lang() selector
THERE ARE NO STANDARDS:
When using the Opera browser, you may notice that SOME PAGES ARE
DISPLAYED DIFFERENTLY THAN IN OTHER BROWSERS. In MOST (not all) cases,
the differences are caused by errors in the pages that are being
displayed. Few Web pages are authored according to W3C's
SPECIFICATIONS WHICH OPERA SUPPORTS (they DO NOT support all of them,
you FUCKING MORON). Opera 8 has two rendering modes, Standards Mode
and Quirks Mode. For a full documentation on this, see separate
document.
The displayed color of an hr is set with the background-color CSS
property in Opera and Netscape 6+. In Netscape 4 and IE it is set with
the color property. Setting both properties to the desired color will
give the same result in all browsers. This will not give the intended
effect if content is added to hr with the content property, but
Netscape 4 and IE don't support this anyway.
The default style sheet in IE and Netscape gives the body element
margin: 8px, Opera uses padding: 8px. Padding is the margin between
the body element and the content, while margin is the margin between
the body and the html element (or the head element if visible). If
either margin or padding is explicitly set on body, the other property
should be set too.
The CSS improvements in IE6 are already implemented in Opera. This
means that IE6's display of web pages in standards-compliant mode is
much closer to Opera's web page display. For further information, see
the Microsoft documentation on IE6.
How many more times do you need it hammered the fuck into yer fat lil
head? THERE ARE NO STANDARDS! Oh your fucking GOD how STUPID do you
get? THERE ARE NO STANDARDS! *rolls eyes* I swear to Satan, it's
like I'm dealing with the dumbest fucking people that God could ever
even CONCEIVE of producing.
Fred Doyle
>> A lot of well copied stuff surrounded by an all capped headlines, "THERE
>> ARE NO STANDARDS" which I guess is supposed to add weight and authority
>> to the statement
You realize, of course, or at least you should realize, that nothing that
you've spent all that time typing proves there are no standards. You've
proven that Opera, doesn't support the standards 100% in how it renders the
page a page. Congratulations. I knew that, too.
Hmmm, does any browser? I don't thnk so. Is that the only reason you can
come up with as to why you might want to code to a standard? Because no
browser supports the w3c standard 100% currently, you can come up with no
reason why you still might want to code to a standard? C'mon. Think....
--
Fred Doyle
Fred Doyle
>> A lot of well copied stuff surrounded by an all capped headlines, "THERE
>> ARE NO STANDARDS" which I guess is supposed to add weight and authority
>> to the statement
Here's a little mental paradox for you, thanks to all your time spent
researching and typing that stuff you copied. Doesn't all that finely copied
text only kind of prove there is a standard, at least in producers of
Opera's mind? I mean, if they didn't think the w3c's standard for HTML 4.01
was an important standard, why would they feel it so critical to document
where they deviate from the standards?
--
Fred Doyle
Davide Montellanico
> On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 15:53:39 +0200, "Davide Montellanico"
> <lati...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>>works with all the major modern browsers.
>
> Look, kid, I realize yer just a lil more than slow...I mean, yer the
> one who was stealing art out of the Tao Te Ching fer christ sake,
Discrediting my work and insulting me doesn't give you credibility.
You are speaking out of your enviness and ignorance. Probably you are too
lazy to improve yourself!
>but
> I'll try and hammer this into ya ONE more time...unless you can say
> ALL BROWSERS EVER MADE...THERE IS NO STANDARD...now, you can say
> there's a STANDARD PROTOCOL...http...in which web content is
> delivered...but THERE IS NO STANDARD for displaying web content. And
> no ammount of your whining and no ammount of your posting to pissy lil
> organizations who spend all day long WISHING for it to happen are
> gonna change the fact that THERE IS NO STANDARD. How many more times
> do I gotta say it Davide? You just tell me, how many more is it gonna
> take? THERE IS NO STANDARD. Write it the fuck down if you have to.
> Hell, I'll go buy a box of crayons, color it the fuck out for ya and
> send it to ya in the mail, how would that be? THERE IS NO STANDARD.
> Is it, is it clickin yet Davide? THERE IS NO STANDARD. How about
> now, startin to sink in? THERE IS NO STANDARD. You just let me know
> how many more times, mmmkay?
I rest my case...
--
Davide
Davide Montellanico
> On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 10:29:42 -0400, "Fred Doyle"
> <fdo...@nycap.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>> ARE NO STANDARDS!
>
>>I can categorically say, with 100% certa<COCK SLAP>
>
> THERE ARE NO STANDARDS:
> http://www.opera.com/docs/specs/
>
> THERE ARE NO STANDARDS:
> HTML 4.01
> Opera version 8 supports HTML 4.01 with these exceptions:
> Event attributes are not supported for the option element
> The col width attribute does not support multilengths
> The object standby and declare attributes are not supported.
> The table cell attributes char and charoff are not supported.
>
> THERE ARE NO STANDARDS:
> XHTML 1.1 support
> Opera version 8 supports XHTML 1.1 with these exceptions:
>
> Event attributes are not supported for the option element
> The col width attribute does not support multilengths
> The object standby and declare attributes are not supported.
> The table cell attributes char and charoff are not supported
> Ruby annotations are not supported
Because Opera browser isn't fully compliant with XHTML 1.1 specifications.
> THERE ARE NO STANDARDS:
> CSS Level 2
> Opera 8 supports all of CSS2 with the exception of:
>
> These properties: font-size-adjust, font-stretch, marker-offset,
> marks, and text-shadow,
> The list style types cjk-ideographic, hebrew, hiragana,
> hiragana-iroha, katakana, katakana-iroha.
> These property/value combinations: "display: marker", "text-align:
> <string>", "visibility: collapse".
> Named pages (as described in section 13.3.2).
> The "@font-face" construct.
> The :lang() selector
Because Opera browser isn't fully compliant with CSS Level 2 specifications.
> THERE ARE NO STANDARDS:
> When using the Opera browser, you may notice that SOME PAGES ARE
> DISPLAYED DIFFERENTLY THAN IN OTHER BROWSERS. In MOST (not all) cases,
> the differences are caused by errors in the pages that are being
> displayed. Few Web pages are authored according to W3C's
> SPECIFICATIONS WHICH OPERA SUPPORTS
>(they DO NOT support all of them,
> you FUCKING MORON).
Excerpt From http://www.opera.com/docs/ :
"Opera prides itself in supporting all major Web standards currently in use,
including CSS 2.1, XHTML 1.1, HTML 4.01, WML 2.0, ECMAScript, DOM 2 and SVG
1.1 tiny. "
Go to http://www.opera.com/docs/specs/ to read about some very few
exceptions.
> Opera 8 has two rendering modes, Standards Mode
> and Quirks Mode. For a full documentation on this, see separate
> document.
All major modern browsers have DOCTYPE Switching. Gecko browsers toggle even
between three modes!
Surprised? Go figure!
> The displayed color of an hr is set with the background-color CSS
> property in Opera and Netscape 6+. In Netscape 4 and IE it is set with
> the color property. Setting both properties to the desired color will
> give the same result in all browsers. This will not give the intended
> effect if content is added to hr with the content property, but
> Netscape 4 and IE don't support this anyway.
The color attribute is proprietary *IE 4 and above* therefore the CSS color
property takes effect only in Explorer browsers.
Many attributes for this element are deprecated:
http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/present/graphics.html#h-15.3
> The default style sheet in IE and Netscape gives the body element
> margin: 8px, Opera uses padding: 8px. Padding is the margin between
> the body element and the content, while margin is the margin between
> the body and the html element (or the head element if visible). If
> either margin or padding is explicitly set on body, the other property
> should be set too.
No concerns here. Margin and padding are standard CSS properties accepted by
all major browsers.That's more than enough to render the body element of a
page in a consistent manner among different browsers.
> The CSS improvements in IE6 are already implemented in Opera. This
> means that IE6's display of web pages in standards-compliant mode is
> much closer to Opera's web page display. For further information, see
> the Microsoft documentation on IE6.
No need to comment on that one. I rest my case...
> How many more times do you need it hammered the fuck into yer fat lil
> head? THERE ARE NO STANDARDS! Oh your fucking GOD how STUPID do you
> get? THERE ARE NO STANDARDS! *rolls eyes* I swear to Satan, it's
> like I'm dealing with the dumbest fucking people that God could ever
> even CONCEIVE of producing.
You are a misunderstood genius *snicker*
--
Davide
> --
>
> Onideus Mad Hatter
Fred Doyle
> "Opera prides itself in supporting all major Web standards .......
But......but......but.......THERE ARE NO STANDARDS
It was all hashed out in froups and groups, by troops who are kooler than
you.Google it and you'll have a cl00, too. I'M RIGHT.
THERE ARE NO STANDARDS.
Let me educate you a little, kiddo. I'LL TYPE STUFF IN ALL CAPS! That will
make my point STRONGER.See what I mean. Now you must see I'M RIGHT.
THERE ARE NO STANDARDS.
I'll call the folks who make Opera names for even thinking there are
standards...................and I'll call you names for posting their stuff.
I'll insult you and your family and anyone who would think like you. How
about now, startin to sink in? I'm sure that will convince everyone I'M
RIGHT.
THERE ARE NO STANDARDS.
I'll try and hammer this into ya ONE more time. Is it, is it clickin yet?
Write it the fuck down if you have to. You just let me know
how many more times, mmmkay? How many more times do you need it hammered the
fuck into yer fat lil head? Oh your fucking GOD how STUPID do you get? I'm
dealing with the dumbest fucking people that God could ever even CONCEIVE of
producing.
See how convincing I can be. It must be because I"M RIGHT.
THERE ARE NO STANDARDS
I know that. I was told that by an Internet demigod.
--
Fred Doyle
Davide Montellanico
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crapflooding
--
Davide
"Fred Doyle" <fdo...@nycap.rr.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:Q6c0g.11$u2...@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
Onideus Mad Hatter
<lati...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>>works with all the major modern browsers.
>> Look, kid, I realize yer just a lil more than slow...I mean, yer the
>> one who was stealing art out of the Tao Te Ching fer christ sake,
>Discrediting my work and insulting me doesn't give you credibility.
...no, it just discredits anything you say and do. Since you can't
pass the ball back, well, I win by default. Sucks to be you I guess.
>You are speaking out of your enviness and ignorance. Probably you are too
>lazy to improve yourself!
...son, you're STEALING material out of the Tao Te Ching...put it
down, you're done, it's time for bed.
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm น x น
Onideus Mad Hatter
wrote:
>>> A lot of well copied stuff surrounded by an all capped headlines, "THERE
>>> ARE NO STANDARDS" which I guess is supposed to add weight and authority
>>> to the statement
>You realize, of cou<COCK SLAP>
Ya just...ya just don't get it, do ya Freddy boi? But you know
something? It REALLY doesn't matter...because YOU'RE AN IDIOT...and
therefore you are not and never will be competition for someone like
me. And hey, lil tip for ya, the longer you run around desperately
wishing for web standards...well, let's just say that your "skill" as
a web developer is never going to extend any farther than plain black
text on a white background. ^_^
Fucking idiot that you are I'm sure that nasty lil reality hasn't
exactly dawned on you...all those websites you were regurgitating
material off of, the W3C itself...yeah, plain text, white
background...because there is no standard. If there was, they would
be able to do more than deliver PLAIN TEXT...on a WHITE
BACKGROUND...oh hey, shhh, shhh, shhh...it's okay baby, don't
cry...you just cover your eyes and ears and go around pretending that
it's a "style"...LOL...
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm น x น
Fred Doyle
almost anyone I know, I love it when you get so wound up you can't write
something that even makes sense. Thanks for the wonderful morning laugh.
"Black text on a white background,......... plain text, white
background,.......they would be able to do more than deliver PLAIN TEXT...on
a WHITE BACKGROUND..." Yes, Captain Queeg. You say somebody been messing
with your strawberrries?
Thanks again. You couldn't have responded any better.
--
Fred Doyle
Fred Doyle
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sporgery
Not sporgery, Davide. That was me. I was copying Mr. Hatter's inimtitable
logical style. Your confusion points out how ridiculous the logic behind
Hatter's posts is. I'm sorry for the confusion, but I'm really pleased that
I hit Hatter's style so completely. I went out of my way to place no
substance at all in the post, just like his. I put together the post that
was all style and ad hominem attacks, and no substance. I understand your
confusion entirely. It was just like every Hatter post.
--
Fred Doyle
Onideus Mad Hatter
wrote:
>Boy, you sure can get your pants all up in a bunch, can't you. Better than
Here, let me put the part that upset you the most back in:
"oh hey, shhh, shhh, shhh...it's okay baby, don't cry...you just cover
your eyes and ears and go around pretending that it's a
"style"...LOL..."
^_^
Davide Montellanico
> On Sat, 15 Apr 2006 19:34:23 +0200, "Davide Montellanico"
> <lati...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>>>>works with all the major modern browsers.
>
>>> Look, kid, I realize yer just a lil more than slow...I mean, yer the
>>> one who was stealing art out of the Tao Te Ching fer christ sake,
>
>>Discrediting my work and insulting me doesn't give you credibility.
>
> ...no, it just discredits anything you say and do. Since you can't
I prefer to pass the ball back to my dog.
>I win by default. Sucks to be you I guess
Sure, you win the idiot prize.
Sucks to be so frustrated by default I guess!
>>You are speaking out of your enviness and ignorance. Probably you are too
>>lazy to improve yourself!
>
> ...son, you're STEALING material out of the Tao Te Ching...put it
> down, you're done, it's time for bed.
Go back to the nursery, little baby.
Davide Montellanico
> On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 21:51:06 GMT, "Fred Doyle" <fdo...@nycap.rr.com>
> wrote:
>
>>>> A lot of well copied stuff surrounded by an all capped headlines,
>>>> "THERE
>>>> ARE NO STANDARDS" which I guess is supposed to add weight and authority
>>>> to the statement
>
>>You realize, of cou<COCK SLAP>
>
> Ya just...ya just don't get it, do ya Freddy boi? But you know
> something? It REALLY doesn't matter...because YOU'RE AN IDIOT...and
> therefore you are not and never will be competition for someone like
> me. And hey, lil tip for ya, the longer you run around desperately
> wishing for web standards...well, let's just say that your "skill" as
> a web developer is never going to extend any farther than plain black
> text on a white background. ^_^
>
> Fucking idiot that you are I'm sure that nasty lil reality hasn't
> exactly dawned on you...all those websites you were regurgitating
> material off of, the W3C itself...yeah, plain text, white
> background...because there is no standard. If there was, they would
> be able to do more than deliver PLAIN TEXT...on a WHITE
> BACKGROUND...oh hey, shhh, shhh, shhh...it's okay baby, don't
> cry...you just cover your eyes and ears and go around pretending that
> it's a "style"...LOL...
What's your style?
Why don't you propose yourself as a designer for Etro or Gucci? You have so
much style and talent that I'm sure you will get a job from them.
Davide Montellanico
> On Thu, 13 Apr 2006 13:18:50 +0200, "Davide Montellanico"
> <lati...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>Do you think that a compliant and accessible website has to be in any case
>>dull and boring?
>>
>>http://www.visitdeadends.com/
>>
>>Some people in ADG think about accessibility and standards as useless
>>goals
>>and limitations for achieving a visual engaging website.
>>The link above proves they are completely wrong!
>
> ...I'm not sure I understand what you're saying...I'm not sure YOU
> understand what you're saying.
I don't understand what you are saying when you are claiming to understand
what you are saying.
> --
Fred Doyle
> Here, let me put the part that upset you the most back in:
There's nothing you could say that upsets me. I think you're fun, you silly
little guy.
--
Fred Doyle
Davide Montellanico
> On Thu, 13 Apr 2006 13:43:06 +0100, Davémon <"davémon"@nospam.com>
> wrote:
>>That's very true, but accessibility doesn't equate to "cross browser
>>compatibility" either, and involves going an extra few yards on top of
>>adhering to standards:
>
> ...I think maybe you missed the part in my post where I explained that
> THERE ARE NO STANDARDS, only RECOMMENDATIONS for standards...and
> since...NO browser maker follows those recommendations to the
> letter...well, there is no standard. There never WILL BE a standard
> (unless you're talking about Flash). Tres simple, non?
The only standard Flash adheres to is ECMA 262 *actionScript language*.
ECMA International is an european industry association for standardization.
http://www.ecma-international.org/
In the same way the W3C developes html/xhtml standards, ECMA developes
standards for scripting and programming languages.
--
Davide
> --
>
> Onideus Mad Hatter
> mhm ą x ą
Onideus Mad Hatter
<lati...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>>Discrediting my work and insulting me doesn't give you credibility.
>> ...no, it just discredits anything you say and do. Since you can't
>> pass the ball back, well, .
>I prefer to pass the ball back to my dog.
Boy those metaphors, they sure are HARD, huh Davide?
>>I win by default. Sucks to be you I guess
>Sure, you win the idiot prize.
I'd hardly call you a "prize", Sunshine.
>Sucks to be so frustrated by default I guess!
Autoflame Grade: A+
>>>You are speaking out of your enviness and ignorance. Probably you are too
>>>lazy to improve yourself!
>> ...son, you're STEALING material out of the Tao Te Ching...put it
>> down, you're done, it's time for bed.
>Go back to the nursery, little baby.
Keep me out of your sexual fantasies you pedo fucker.
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm น x น
http://www.backwater-productions.net
http://www.backwater-productions.net/hatter-blog
Onideus Mad Hatter
wrote:
>> Here, let me put the part that upset you the most back in:
>There's nothing you could say that upsets me.
If that were REALLY true...why would you have a need to try and
convince me of it? LOL
>I think you're fun, you silly little guy.
Hey everybody, did you hear that? Freddy Stupid is HAVING FUN!
REALLY...he uh, he just needs to make sure that WE ALL KNOW how much
FUN he's having...REALLY...it's important to him I guess...yeah I
don't really get it either...perhaps its an OVERCOMPENSATION defense
mechanism. ^_^
Onideus Mad Hatter
<lati...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>"Onideus Mad Hatter" <use...@backwater-productions.net> ha scritto nel
>messaggio news:d8ds32huaic79t4j7...@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 13 Apr 2006 13:18:50 +0200, "Davide Montellanico"
>> <lati...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>
>>>Do you think that a compliant and accessible website has to be in any case
>>>dull and boring?
>>>
>>>http://www.visitdeadends.com/
>>>
>>>Some people in ADG think about accessibility and standards as useless
>>>goals
>>>and limitations for achieving a visual engaging website.
>>>The link above proves they are completely wrong!
>>
>> ...I'm not sure I understand what you're saying...I'm not sure YOU
>> understand what you're saying.
>
>
>I don't understand what you are saying when you are claiming to understand
>what you are saying.
Try RITALIN Davide...seriously.
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm ą x ą
Davide Montellanico
> On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 00:01:43 +0200, "Davide Montellanico"
> <lati...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>>>>Discrediting my work and insulting me doesn't give you credibility.
>
>>> ...no, it just discredits anything you say and do. Since you can't
>>> pass the ball back, well, .
>
>>I prefer to pass the ball back to my dog.
>
> Boy those metaphors, they sure are HARD, huh Davide?
No metaphor. A dog has a better IQ than you.
>>>I win by default. Sucks to be you I guess
>
>>Sure, you win the idiot prize.
>
> I'd hardly call you a "prize", Sunshine.
Your irony is scarce. Irony and sarcasm are things too much sophisticated
for your mind.
>>Sucks to be so frustrated by default I guess!
>
> Autoflame Grade: A+
Again, you showed us your IQ
You can't do irony. Chance plays tricks on you.
>>>>You are speaking out of your enviness and ignorance. Probably you are
>>>>too
>>>>lazy to improve yourself!
>
>>> ...son, you're STEALING material out of the Tao Te Ching...put it
>>> down, you're done, it's time for bed.
>
>>Go back to the nursery, little baby.
it were self-evident to everybody but you that in my last phrase there were
no sexual fantasies involved.
You showed us your childish and immature behaviors, therefore, despite your
old age, I can't consider you an adult person.
> Keep me out of your sexual fantasies you pedo fucker.
I rest my case.
> --
>
> Onideus Mad Hatter
> mhm ą x ą
Davide Montellanico
> On Sun, 16 Apr 2006 22:50:49 GMT, "Fred Doyle" <fdo...@nycap.rr.com>
> wrote:
>
>>> Here, let me put the part that upset you the most back in:
>
>>There's nothing you could say that upsets me.
>
> If that were REALLY true...why would you have a need to try and
> convince me of it? LOL
>
>>I think you're fun, you silly little guy.
>
> Hey everybody, did you hear that? Freddy Stupid is HAVING FUN!
> REALLY...he uh, he just needs to make sure that WE ALL KNOW how much
> FUN he's having...REALLY...it's important to him I guess...yeah I
> don't really get it either...perhaps its an OVERCOMPENSATION defense
> mechanism. ^_^
I agree with Fred. You are entertaining us very well. Probably Fred have had
a lot of free time during holiday.
What is better than a good laugh at your idocies?
Personally I have had plenty of time too. Unfortunately, starting from
tomorrow I will have less time to spend at reading your posts.
Davide Montellanico
> On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 00:33:10 +0200, "Davide Montellanico"
> <lati...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>>"Onideus Mad Hatter" <use...@backwater-productions.net> ha scritto nel
>>messaggio news:d8ds32huaic79t4j7...@4ax.com...
>>> On Thu, 13 Apr 2006 13:18:50 +0200, "Davide Montellanico"
>>> <lati...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>Do you think that a compliant and accessible website has to be in any
>>>>case
>>>>dull and boring?
>>>>
>>>>http://www.visitdeadends.com/
>>>>
>>>>Some people in ADG think about accessibility and standards as useless
>>>>goals
>>>>and limitations for achieving a visual engaging website.
>>>>The link above proves they are completely wrong!
>>>
>>> ...I'm not sure I understand what you're saying...I'm not sure YOU
>>> understand what you're saying.
>>
>>
>>I don't understand what you are saying when you are claiming to understand
>>what you are saying.
>
> Try RITALIN Davide...seriously.
No I will ask help from them:
http://www.sissa.it/
Your concepts are too way complicated for me. What a genius you are!
--
Davide
> --
>
> Onideus Mad Hatter
> mhm น x น
Onideus Mad Hatter
<lati...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>>>>Discrediting my work and insulting me doesn't give you credibility.
>>>> ...no, it just discredits anything you say and do. Since you can't
>>>> pass the ball back, well, .
>>>I prefer to pass the ball back to my dog.
>> Boy those metaphors, they sure are HARD, huh Davide?
>No metaphor. A dog has a better IQ than you.
It doesn't ever stop raining stupid in your reality, does it, Davide?
>>>>I win by default. Sucks to be you I guess
>>>Sure, you win the idiot prize.
>> I'd hardly call you a "prize", Sunshine.
>Your irony is scarce. Irony and sarcasm are things too much sophisticated
>for your mind.
"too much sophisticated", eh Jethro?
>>>Sucks to be so frustrated by default I guess!
>> Autoflame Grade: A+
>Again, you showed us your IQ
What does your new found obsession with mathematical parlor tricks and
random trivia have to do with the fact that you insulted yourself?
>You can't do irony. Chance plays tricks on you.
Geez, it's like I hit you in the head too hard or something...now
you're all like drooling and incoherent.
>>>>>You are speaking out of your enviness and ignorance. Probably you are
>>>>>too
>>>>>lazy to improve yourself!
>>>> ...son, you're STEALING material out of the Tao Te Ching...put it
>>>> down, you're done, it's time for bed.
>>>Go back to the nursery, little baby.
>it were self-evident to everybody
"it were" self-evident, huh Davide?
>but you that in my last phrase there were
>no sexual fantasies involved.
D00d, you like to fuck kids, that's not cool okay?
>You showed us your childish and immature behaviors, therefore, despite your
>old age, I can't consider you an adult person.
"it were" that self-evident were it? LOL...I swear, it's like the
irony meter just exploded.
>> Keep me out of your sexual fantasies you pedo fucker.
>I rest my case.
Your case, huh? Are you on trial? Davide, the Usenet froup ADG
hereby finds you guilty of being a retard and stealing other peoples
art, you are sentenced to a life of eternal ridicule and self
loathing. Bailiff, take this idiot away!
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm น x น
Davide Montellanico
English is not my native language. Anyway I doubt it is yours too. Please
find out some good dictionary and learn something new.
Anyway I will not reply to your other posts. Now it's time to stop the game,
come back to my desk and work.
--
Davide
Onideus Mad Hatter
<lati...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>"Onideus Mad Hatter" <use...@backwater-productions.net> ha scritto nel
>messaggio news:m4c642dglbduhjd1j...@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 00:33:10 +0200, "Davide Montellanico"
>> <lati...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>
>>>"Onideus Mad Hatter" <use...@backwater-productions.net> ha scritto nel
>>>messaggio news:d8ds32huaic79t4j7...@4ax.com...
>>>> On Thu, 13 Apr 2006 13:18:50 +0200, "Davide Montellanico"
>>>> <lati...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>Do you think that a compliant and accessible website has to be in any
>>>>>case
>>>>>dull and boring?
>>>>>
>>>>>http://www.visitdeadends.com/
>>>>>
>>>>>Some people in ADG think about accessibility and standards as useless
>>>>>goals
>>>>>and limitations for achieving a visual engaging website.
>>>>>The link above proves they are completely wrong!
>>>>
>>>> ...I'm not sure I understand what you're saying...I'm not sure YOU
>>>> understand what you're saying.
>>>
>>>
>>>I don't understand what you are saying when you are claiming to understand
>>>what you are saying.
>>
>> Try RITALIN Davide...seriously.
>
>
>No I will ask help from them:
>http://www.sissa.it/
D00d, the Italians are all pussies, what are you humping their leg
for? The Italians are such fuckin cowards that during WWII they wore
brown uniforms so when they shit themselves in fear no one would be
able to tell.
>Your concepts are too way complicated for me.
Oh it wouldn't take much I'm sure.
>What a genius you are!
Compared to you most everyone is.
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm ą x ą
Davide Montellanico
I'm sure not all americans are idiots as you are!
--
Davide
>>Your concepts are too way complicated for me.
>
> Oh it wouldn't take much I'm sure.
>
>>What a genius you are!
>
> Compared to you most everyone is.
>
> --
>
> Onideus Mad Hatter
> mhm น x น
Onideus Mad Hatter
<lati...@my-deja.com> wrote:
Yeah, like THATS an excuse. LOL
>Anyway I doubt it is yours too.
Do you have a lot? Doubts I mean.
>Please find out some good dictionary and learn something new.
You know I've noticed that the more frustrated you get...the more your
grip on the language starts to slip.
>Anyway I will not reply to your other posts.
Yeah I'd run the fuck away and quit while you're behind too if I were
you.
>Now it's time to stop the game, come back to my desk and work.
Scanning other people's art sure is HARD, innt? ^_^
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm ą x ą
Onideus Mad Hatter
<lati...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>>No I will ask help from them:
>>>http://www.sissa.it/
>> D00d, the Italians are all pussies, what are you humping their leg
>> for? The Italians are such fuckin cowards that during WWII they wore
>> brown uniforms so when they shit themselves in fear no one would be
>> able to tell.
>I'm sure not all americans are idiots as you are!
Uh oh, did I strike a nerve? What was it that the Germans used to
call you guys...oh yeah, katzenfresser...LOL...
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm ą x ą
Onideus Mad Hatter
<lati...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>"Onideus Mad Hatter" <use...@backwater-productions.net> ha scritto nel
>messaggio news:7vb64297lqjqhggot...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 16 Apr 2006 22:50:49 GMT, "Fred Doyle" <fdo...@nycap.rr.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>> Here, let me put the part that upset you the most back in:
>>
>>>There's nothing you could say that upsets me.
>>
>> If that were REALLY true...why would you have a need to try and
>> convince me of it? LOL
>>
>>>I think you're fun, you silly little guy.
>>
>> Hey everybody, did you hear that? Freddy Stupid is HAVING FUN!
>> REALLY...he uh, he just needs to make sure that WE ALL KNOW how much
>> FUN he's having...REALLY...it's important to him I guess...yeah I
>> don't really get it either...perhaps its an OVERCOMPENSATION defense
>> mechanism. ^_^
>
>I agree with Fred.
Are ya...are ya fuckin on the side too, Davide?
>You are entertaining us very well.
Oh boy, you know they've lost when they start retarding back into the
sheeple mentality for support.
>Probably Fred have had a lot of free time during holiday.
...during what?
>What is better than a good laugh at your idocies?
...well, better FOR YOU would probably be a bitter moment of stabbing
self-reflection.
>Personally I have had plenty of time too.
Yeah I hear stealing other people's art doesn't take much time or
effort.
>Unfortunately, starting from tomorrow I will have less time to spend
>at reading your posts.
*sigh*
OH NOS U R GOING TO START SHUTTING YOURSELF TEH FUCK UP?!?!
Jesus fuck your mother, what WILL I do?
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm น x น
http://www.backwater-productions.net
http://www.backwater-productions.net/hatter-blog
Davide Montellanico
> On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 10:21:12 +0200, "Davide Montellanico"
> <lati...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>>>>No I will ask help from them:
>>>>http://www.sissa.it/
>
>>> D00d, the Italians are all pussies, what are you humping their leg
>>> for? The Italians are such fuckin cowards that during WWII they wore
>>> brown uniforms so when they shit themselves in fear no one would be
>>> able to tell.
>
>>I'm sure not all americans are idiots as you are!
>
> Uh oh, did I strike a nerve? What was it that the Germans used to
> call you guys...oh yeah, katzenfresser...LOL...
You strike your ignorance!
During the Roman Empire your ancestries were living in a cave. You were
abrutedly retarded. We were the centre of the civilized world:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Empire
--
Davide
> --
>
> Onideus Mad Hatter
Davide Montellanico
>>English is not my native language.
>
> Yeah, like THATS an excuse. LOL
Quousque tandem, Onideus Minus Habens, abutere patientia nostra?
>>Anyway I doubt it is yours too.
>
> Do you have a lot? Doubts I mean.
Minus habens!
>>Please find out some good dictionary and learn something new.
>
> You know I've noticed that the more frustrated you get...the more your
> grip on the language starts to slip.
Ipse Dixit :-)
>>Anyway I will not reply to your other posts.
>
> Yeah I'd run the fuck away and quit while you're behind too if I were
> you.
Hic manebimus optime!
--
Davide
>
> Onideus Mad Hatter
Larry Linson
use...@backwater-productions.net wrote on 04/17/2006 1:07 AM:
>
> D00d, you like to fuck kids, that's not cool okay?
Got any evidence to back up that comment? Or are you just writing libelous
statements now?
Larry Linson
use...@backwater-productions.net wrote on 04/16/2006 11:06 PM:
> If that were REALLY true...why would you have a need to try and
> convince me of it?
Why do you feel the need to convince me that you are smart?
Fred Doyle
ranting paragraphs WITH ALL CAPS. I guess overcompensation is in the eye of
the beholder.
Your turn.
--
Fred Doyle
Fred Doyle
> Hey everybody, did you hear that?
Um, this is a newsgroup since you lost track. No one hears anything. You
talking to those voice in your head again?
--
Fred Doyle
SpaceGirl
Onideus Mad Hatter wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 15:53:39 +0200, "Davide Montellanico"
> <lati...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> >works with all the major modern browsers.
>
> Look, kid, I realize yer just a lil more than slow...I mean, yer the
> I'll try and hammer this into ya ONE more time...unless you can say
> ALL BROWSERS EVER MADE...THERE IS NO STANDARD...now, you can say
> there's a STANDARD PROTOCOL...http...in which web content is
> delivered...but THERE IS NO STANDARD for displaying web content. And
> no ammount of your whining and no ammount of your posting to pissy lil
> organizations who spend all day long WISHING for it to happen are
> gonna change the fact that THERE IS NO STANDARD. How many more times
> do I gotta say it Davide? You just tell me, how many more is it gonna
> take? THERE IS NO STANDARD. Write it the fuck down if you have to.
> Hell, I'll go buy a box of crayons, color it the fuck out for ya and
> send it to ya in the mail, how would that be? THERE IS NO STANDARD.
> Is it, is it clickin yet Davide? THERE IS NO STANDARD. How about
> now, startin to sink in? THERE IS NO STANDARD. You just let me know
> how many more times, mmmkay?
I hate to jump in here, but there ARE standards - it's just that they
are implimentated slightly differently between each browser
manufacturer. Both IE and Firefox, for example, have Standard
Compliance modes (their words, not mine)...
SpaceGirl
Onideus Mad Hatter wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 10:21:12 +0200, "Davide Montellanico"
> <lati...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> >>>No I will ask help from them:
> >>>http://www.sissa.it/
>
> >> D00d, the Italians are all pussies, what are you humping their leg
> >> for? The Italians are such fuckin cowards that during WWII they wore
> >> brown uniforms so when they shit themselves in fear no one would be
> >> able to tell.
>
> >I'm sure not all americans are idiots as you are!
>
> Uh oh, did I strike a nerve? What was it that the Germans used to
> call you guys...oh yeah, katzenfresser...LOL...
>
> --
>
> Onideus Mad Hatter
> http://www.backwater-productions.net
> http://www.backwater-productions.net/hatter-blog
Jesus... you're disgusting :\ Really hope none of your clients ever
find out what you post in here.
Davémon
> On Thu, 13 Apr 2006 13:43:06 +0100, Davémon <"davémon"@nospam.com>
> wrote:
>
>>Onideus Mad Hatter arranged shapes to form:
>>
>>> On Thu, 13 Apr 2006 13:18:50 +0200, "Davide Montellanico"
>>> <lati...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Do you think that a compliant and accessible website has to be in any case
>>>>dull and boring?
>>>>
>>>>http://www.visitdeadends.com/
>>>>
>>>>Some people in ADG think about accessibility and standards as useless goals
>>>>and limitations for achieving a visual engaging website.
>>>>The link above proves they are completely wrong!
>>>
>>> ...I'm not sure I understand what you're saying...I'm not sure YOU
>>> understand what you're saying.
>>
>>Well I understand what I think Davide is saying. And other than a couple of
>>validation errors on the site, I agree.
>>
>>> If you're claiming that it's W3C
>>> compliant and therefore more accessible...well you're wrong on both
>>> counts. W3C validation most certainly DOES NOT equate to cross
>>> browser compatibility
>>
>>That's very true, but accessibility doesn't equate to "cross browser
>>compatibility" either, and involves going an extra few yards on top of
>>adhering to standards:
>
> ...I think maybe you missed the part in my post where I explained that
> THERE ARE NO STANDARDS, only RECOMMENDATIONS for standards...
No, I didn't miss that. It's just not relevant. Swap "standards" to "w3c
recommendation: (x)html specifications" if you want, doesn't really change
what I wrote.
--
Davémon
http://www.nightsoil.co.uk/
Davémon
> On Sat, 15 Apr 2006 19:34:23 +0200, "Davide Montellanico"
> <lati...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>>>>works with all the major modern browsers.
>
>>> Look, kid, I realize yer just a lil more than slow...I mean, yer the
>>> one who was stealing art out of the Tao Te Ching fer christ sake,
>
>>Discrediting my work and insulting me doesn't give you credibility.
>
> ...no, it just discredits anything you say and do. Since you can't
> pass the ball back, well, I win by default. Sucks to be you I guess.
>
>>You are speaking out of your enviness and ignorance. Probably you are too
>>lazy to improve yourself!
>
> ...son, you're STEALING material out of the Tao Te Ching...put it
> down, you're done, it's time for bed.
>
This is getting a bit boring. Sorry, but I'm going to have to let Matt in
on the joke.
Matt, there's this whole /style/ of eastern art called Sumi-e. It's not
just that one book you found on Amazon.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumi-e
Think of it a bit like manga, lots of artists all use a similar style, but
they're not really stealing it, it's kind of a "cultural convention". You
could even relate that sharing of style to the 'avant-garde' movements of
20th century art (expressionism, dada, cubism, surrealism, de Stijl,
pop-art, post-expressionism, whatever), but well, let's not be culturally
imperialistic by measuring eastern traditions with our own values.
--
Davémon
http://www.nightsoil.co.uk/
Drew
> Jesus... you're disgusting :\ Really hope none of your clients ever
> find out what you post in here.
>
Actually, he's posted in 65 other groups in the past 6 months with over
8500 posts. Google his name and any potential client will find out what
Usenet already knows.
D
Fred Doyle
"SpaceGirl" <nothespac...@subhuman.net> wrote in
>>Jesus... you're disgusting :\ Really hope none of your clients ever
find out what you post in here.
Clients? Doesn't he need to have clients for them to find out?
Fred Doyle
Fred Doyle
"Drew" <whoisthat...@hotmail.com> wrote
> Actually, he's posted in 65 other groups in the past 6 months with over
> 8500 posts.
LOL! Anybody want to guess how many hours it takes to read and respond to
that many posts? Now I didn't say respond intelligently, because that's
asking too much.
But in his case, you have to understand, they aren't just posts. He is
forging and evolving Usenet when he posts. They are Word Art, and someday
he'll be recognized as the Word Artist that he really is. Then all this is
going to start paying off for him big time. Then no one will be laughing at
him. (well, maybe just a little)
Fred Doyle
Onideus Mad Hatter
His mom told he was lookin at kiddie porn...and his moms word is good
enough for me.
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm น x น
http://www.backwater-productions.net
http://www.backwater-productions.net/hatter-blog
Hatter Quotes
-------------
"I'm not a professional, I'm an artist."
"The more I learn the more I'm killing my idols."
"Is it wrong to incur and then use the hate ridden, vengeful stupidity
of complete strangers in random Usenet froups to further my art?"
"Freedom is only a concept, like race it's merely a social construct
that doesn't really exist outside of your ability to convince others
of its relevancy."
"Next time slow up a lil, then maybe you won't jump the gun and start
creamin yer panties before it's time to pop the champagne proper."
"Reality is directly proportionate to how creative you are."
"People are pretty fucking high on themselves if they think that
they're just born with a soul. *snicker*...yeah, like they're just
givin em out for free."
"Quible, quible said the Hare. Quite a lot of quibling...everywhere.
So the Hare took a long stare and decided at best, to leave the rest,
to their merry little mess."
"There's a difference between 'bad' and 'so earth shatteringly
horrible it makes the angels scream in terror as they violently rip
their heads off, their blood spraying into the faces of a thousand
sweet innocent horrified children, who will forever have the terrible
images burned into their tiny little minds'."
"How sad that you're such a poor judge of style that you can't even
properly gauge the artistic worth of your own efforts."
"Those who record history are those who control history."
"Is my .sig delimiter broken? Really? You're sure? Awww,
gee...that's too bad...for YOU!" `, )
Onideus Mad Hatter
...when did I EVER try and convince you that I was smart? I mean,
that would be like trying to teach a rock how to fly...sure you could
chuck the rock off a cliff and it would ~sorta~ fly...for about 7
seconds...then it would pretty much just fall, hit the ground and get
spattered into a million little dirt fragments.
Onideus Mad Hatter
wrote:
This coming from the fucking fruitloop who replied TWICE to the SAME
message. By the by, Freddy Stupid, you probably shouldn't be ~too~
proud of your inability to keep up with me word wise...I mean maybe
you're just a slow typer...but then maybe you're just...well, slow.
Onideus Mad Hatter
wrote:
D00d, the reason why your website looks like some long lost remnant of
1996 web coding...yeah, it's because you're actually DUMB ENOUGH to
think that there are standards when, huh, nope, nope, der sure ain't.
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm ą x ą
Onideus Mad Hatter
<nothespac...@subhuman.net> wrote:
>
>Onideus Mad Hatter wrote:
>> On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 10:21:12 +0200, "Davide Montellanico"
>> <lati...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>
>> >>>No I will ask help from them:
>> >>>http://www.sissa.it/
>>
>> >> D00d, the Italians are all pussies, what are you humping their leg
>> >> for? The Italians are such fuckin cowards that during WWII they wore
>> >> brown uniforms so when they shit themselves in fear no one would be
>> >> able to tell.
>>
>> >I'm sure not all americans are idiots as you are!
>>
>> Uh oh, did I strike a nerve? What was it that the Germans used to
>> call you guys...oh yeah, katzenfresser...LOL...
>>
>> --
>>
>> Onideus Mad Hatter
>> mhm ą x ą
>> http://www.backwater-productions.net
>> http://www.backwater-productions.net/hatter-blog
>
>Jesus... you're disgusting :\
I'm honest...some people just don't like being reminded of the past.
You wanna talk about the holocaust? How about 9-11? ^_^
>Really hope none of your clients ever
>find out what you post in here.
Oh, it really doesn't matter. I can assure you, pretty much all my
clients come to me for my SKILLS not my opinions. And more often than
not I do what's called "subcontracting", so technically my name and
such never appears in the final released version of...whatever it
happens to be.
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
SpaceGirl
Onideus Mad Hatter wrote:
> On 18 Apr 2006 03:36:49 -0700, "SpaceGirl"
> <nothespac...@subhuman.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >Onideus Mad Hatter wrote:
> >> On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 10:21:12 +0200, "Davide Montellanico"
> >> <lati...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >>>No I will ask help from them:
> >> >>>http://www.sissa.it/
> >>
> >> >> D00d, the Italians are all pussies, what are you humping their leg
> >> >> for? The Italians are such fuckin cowards that during WWII they wore
> >> >> brown uniforms so when they shit themselves in fear no one would be
> >> >> able to tell.
> >>
> >> >I'm sure not all americans are idiots as you are!
> >>
> >> Uh oh, did I strike a nerve? What was it that the Germans used to
> >> call you guys...oh yeah, katzenfresser...LOL...
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >> Onideus Mad Hatter
> >> http://www.backwater-productions.net
> >> http://www.backwater-productions.net/hatter-blog
> >
> >Jesus... you're disgusting :\
>
> I'm honest...some people just don't like being reminded of the past.
> You wanna talk about the holocaust? How about 9-11? ^_^
>
That's got nothing to do with it and you know it. You used these topics
as a deliberate slur, and attack on the poster. It's really unpleasant.
> >Really hope none of your clients ever
> >find out what you post in here.
>
> Oh, it really doesn't matter. I can assure you, pretty much all my
> clients come to me for my SKILLS not my opinions. And more often than
> not I do what's called "subcontracting", so technically my name and
> such never appears in the final released version of...whatever it
> happens to be.
Oh here we go again. Yawn.
Davémon
> 1996 web coding... yeah, it's because you're actually DUMB ENOUGH to
> think that there are standards when, huh, nope, nope, der sure ain't.
>
Do I look bothered? You think ACCESSIBILITY and CROSS BROWSER COMPATIBILITY
are the same thing. LOL!
--
Davémon
http://www.nightsoil.co.uk/
Onideus Mad Hatter
wrote:
>Do I look bothered?
Let me think...
>You think ACCESSIBILITY and CROSS BROWSER COMPATIBILITY
>are the same thing. LOL!
Yeah, you look pretty bothered to me.
Not the same thing, but you certainly can't have one without the
other. I think the problem here is that you're confusing
accessibility with usability. For example you can have a site that's
accessible to all but with such poor usability that no one will be
able to make use of what's on the site...but they'll all be able to
access it. Tres simple, non?
Davémon
Do I look bothered :-) ?
>>You think ACCESSIBILITY and CROSS BROWSER COMPATIBILITY
>>are the same thing. LOL!
>
> Yeah, you look pretty bothered to me.
>
LOL! Am I bothered tho?
> Not the same thing, but you certainly can't have one without the
> other.
Of course you can. You can easily achieve either without achieving the
other. Did you actually read:
http://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/accessibility.php
Seriously Matt, if you want training on modern web-development terminology
and practice (or art-history and visual culture for that matter), I'm happy
to oblige, but you've got to do your homework as well, you can't expect to
learn by just being spoon fed by me, you'll have to put the work in too.
OK?
> I think the problem here is that you're confusing
> accessibility with usability.
The problem here is that you /wish/ I was confusing them, then you could
move the subject away from the fact that you're still labouring under the
misconception that "cross-browser compatibility" and "accessibility" are
inextricable from each other.
--
Davémon
http://www.nightsoil.co.uk/
Fred Doyle
"iehsmith" <inezhsmit...@earthlink.net> wrote
>
> The world may commemorate his passing with thistles bound in barbed wire
> in
> recoginition of what he brought to usenet. (or, not)
IMHO, he doesn't stand a chance of reaching any level of recognition. For
all his bluster, like most of us, he'll pass unnoticed except by those that
he has created a positive realtionship with.
Or, to cite one of my favorite pop quotes from my genreration, "And in the
end, the love you take is equal to the love you make."
Fred Doyle
Fred Doyle
"iehsmith" <inezhsmit...@earthlink.net> wrote
>
> Speaking of generations; we all knew Peggy Lee, but I never hear anyone
> talk
> about one of my favorite torch singers, Julie London. Never hear her
> played
> on the radio, never a mention. Do you remembr her, Fred?
>
I certainly do Remember Julie London. Her version of "Cry Me a River" or "My
Funny Valentine" can still send shivers up my spine. (And by the way, I
don't mean Justin Timberlake's song Cry Me a River" for peole uner 40. How
the hell can he name a song "Cry Me a River." That's like writing a new song
and calling it the "Star Spangled Banner" or "Stardust" or a new book and
calling it "Moby Dick." Did he not know about the REAL "Cry Me a River" or
did he just not have a clue? Sorry personal rant at a low level pop
performer.)
> It comes to mind because I heard Peggy singing "is that all there is" on
> WWOZ yesterday. Love that song, but would love to hear Julie London or
> Nina
> Simone sing it.
>
I prefer either of those singers to Peggy Lee. She was never my favorite.
> Coming to JazzFest? The French Quarter Fest is this weekend.
>
No, sorry. I can't afford it. But I will be thinking of you this year at the
Freihoffer Jazz Festival, June 24th and 25th, especially on the 25th when
there will be two of New Orleans finest acts there, Etta James and the
Preservation Hall Jazz Band.
http://www.spac.org/spac-calendar/spac-event-calendar-view-detail.asp?varEventID=22
http://www.spac.org/spac-calendar/spac-event-calendar-view-detail.asp?varEventID=23
Also, if anybody is in this area, and wants great jazz for free, the
Skidmore Jazz Institute (June 24th-July 8) has announced its "faculty" for
this year's Institute. The Institute always puts on a series of free
concerts in the evening, after the classroom sessions. Get there early,
things fill up fast. Here's this year's line-up:
http://www.skidmore.edu/administration/osp/summer_jazz/faculty.htm
Here's some of my photos from the 2004 Institute:
http://www.leafpublishing.com/drebel/brecker_gallery/index.html
http://www.leafpublishing.com/drebel/cobb_web/index.html
Also free in this area on Sept 16-17 is the Lake George jazz Festival. No
line-up announced yet.
Fred Doyle
James Douglas
> Do you think that a compliant and accessible website has to be in any case
> dull and boring?
>
> http://www.visitdeadends.com/
>
> Some people in ADG think about accessibility and standards as useless goals
> and limitations for achieving a visual engaging website.
> The link above proves they are completely wrong!
>
>
"Please don't feed the animals......"
Fred Doyle
"James Douglas" <james....@genesis-software.com> wrote
> Like the sign at the zoo said
> "Please don't feed the animals......"
>
Now that comparison is mean. I can't think of any animal on the planet that
deserves that insult.
--
Fred Doyle
Larry Linson
use...@backwater-productions.net wrote on 04/18/2006 9:47 PM:
> On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 17:21:35 -0700, Larry Linson
> <bou...@localhost.not> wrote:
>
>> in article 4oi642pfptenvcr6n...@4ax.com, Onideus Mad Hatter at
>> use...@backwater-productions.net wrote on 04/17/2006 1:07 AM:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> D00d, you like to fuck kids, that's not cool okay?
>>
>> Got any evidence to back up that comment? Or are you just writing libelous
>> statements now?
>
> His mom told he was lookin at kiddie porn...and his moms word is good
> enough for me.
Obviously you have no evidence, now you just admitted it.
James Douglas
Fred Doyle
> Dude, was not to you but OMH! Also was not trying.
I know it wasn't to me. But no animal would be pleased to be compared to
Hatter. Most animals generally show much more intelligence, self-control and
have an ability to learn.
--
Fred Doyle
Gordon Blackstone
> and have an ability to learn
--
-gb
James Douglas
something in 6 years of high school...........