The Internet Classroom: Standards debate

Post by aqhong

(aqhong) — Thu, 06 Jul 2006 06:51:19 GMT

Ooh, yeah, I remember that. By the way, if anyone is interested in reading our discussion of XHTML MIME types (ha), you can find an excerpt here: http://ozphactor.home.comcast.net/misc/log.html

Post by MadnessX

(MadnessX) — Thu, 06 Jul 2006 06:41:50 GMT

This reminds me of the chat that Kass, Kenton, Alex, and I participated in during the first week... >.> It was 2AM XD

Post by Dennis

(Dennis) — Tue, 04 Jul 2006 17:52:14 GMT

hmm all this big-speechifying makes me want to -.-

Post by lloyd

(lloyd) — Tue, 04 Jul 2006 00:49:09 GMT

Uhm... students can also big-speechify, you know. ::chuckle::

Post by MANG0xSALSA

(MANG0xSALSA) — Mon, 03 Jul 2006 22:05:35 GMT

i love it how this thread is like all TAs giving big web-speeches..

Post by temporal

(temporal) — Mon, 03 Jul 2006 19:50:51 GMT

Every IoCM page validates*! And that's mostly due to Kass introducing me to the concept of valid HTML a few years back.

That said, my opinion on standards is: Most certified standards suck. Standards are developed by comittee, and the usual result is a convoluted mess with far more features than it ever should have needed. On the other hand, systems developed by a couple really smart people and adopted as de-facto standards can be much cleaner and nicer. "Too many cooks spoil the soup" and all that.

However, the fact that standards sucks doesn't mean you shouldn't comply with them as much as possible. Complying with the standards that are there is much better than relying on random quirks of some particular set of browsers to render the page the way you expect.

* Except when no standard exists to cover required functionality. Specifically, the chat page does not validate because the standard for embedding Java applets doesn't work and because there is no standard for turning off autocomplete in text inputs.

Post by lloyd

(lloyd) — Mon, 03 Jul 2006 16:29:14 GMT

Quote from kass:

Whoa. You just articulated one of the main points of the conclusion to my talk on Wednesday. ::chuckle::

Post by kass

(kass) — Mon, 03 Jul 2006 16:03:43 GMT

Quote from lloyd:

It's hard to argue to uphold standards when you have 80,000,000 (and counting) websites that have zero regard for standards.

This is exactly the problem that I've been tormented by. I can't be sure, but my earlier debate with Quad was probably over this issue. I was likely frustrated by the fact that Manila logs would never validate and was thinking, why should I bother? Hence the switch to MoveableType. Manila has been outmoded in more ways than one.

My point in teaching standards is in the event that any of them -- and you really never know -- end up pursuing web design as more than just a sideline hobby and BECOME the inventor of the next MySpace. Such a person should really be responsible for making sure that their product is producing valid code that will make a good portion of standards-aware users happy. For those who aren't aware, it doesn't hurt them in the least.

Quote from lloyd:

(note: it is in this one area of the internet that I think we should ditch our early-adopter, elitist attitudes. particularly the very snooty one towards non web-standard and butt-ugly services like MySpace; we continue to hold those attitudes at peril of being marginalised. our mantra should be: "Know Thy Enemy")

Also agreed... keep telling the TAs that MySpace is a tool and not inherently evil. XP Except in the fact that it isn't standards compliant. Pah.

Post by stevie

(stevie) — Mon, 03 Jul 2006 15:47:19 GMT

Quote from lloyd:

lloyd, as always, your diction is amazing. "butt-ugly." HA.

Post by lloyd

(lloyd) — Mon, 03 Jul 2006 14:56:43 GMT

Okay here's the big issue, I think...

...we're teaching (and have been teaching) standards-based coding for several years now. But with kids these days getting weaned on content-creation using services (in their MySpaces and such) that have utter disregard for standards, they are probably getting the attitude "who cares"? It's hard to argue to uphold standards when you have 80,000,000 (and counting) websites that have zero regard for standards.

That is a huge center of gravity against which our puny little satellite of ideal web standards is no match.

To be clear: I'm not at all saying we ditch or minimize the teaching of standards. Just that we should be aware that it has become an uphill battle, more so than ever before. And we thought IE noncompliance was the biggest hindrance? ::chuckle::

The response to this poll illustrates my point perfectly. Since the poll was posted (on the 28th), only 4 respondents even bothered to vote... and probably one of those was a TA/staff. ::chuckle::