MetaFilter posts tagged with standards and web

Why do we have an IMG element?

chunking express — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 08:58:25 -0800

24 (Web) Ways of 2006

juiceCake — Sat, 30 Dec 2006 19:56:27 -0800

24 Ways - 2006 Edition This year's possibly useful 24 articles containing 24 tips and tutorials for those of us who love CSS and other related web development techniques. Last year's links are included too.

"We were surprised by how few had tested their websites with disabled users," he said.

amberglow — Fri, 17 Mar 2006 19:26:24 -0800

Usability Exchange -- a testing service determining site accessibility for disabled users. They're only in the UK now, but it seems like a great idea. Organisations set up their tests online and submit them directly to disabled testers in our database. Testers are then free to complete these tests in their own time, earning money for each test they complete. As tests are completed by users, organisations can view test results, web page logs and other information in real time. More here at BBC, including some concerns.

Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed people can change the browser.

weston — Thu, 29 Jul 2004 16:57:00 -0800

Internet Explorer 7. Dean Edwards does what a team of developers with billions behind them apparently can't -- update IE to work with modern standards. Almost, anyway... as he says, it's still in alpha, and has its quirks, but check out the Pure CSS Menus demo, for example.

W3C members' sites put to the test.

riffola — Tue, 25 Feb 2003 11:16:42 -0800

State of Validation 2003. Off the 430 W3C members, only 28 (6.5%) have sites that validate with the W3C validator as either HTML or XHTML! This represents an increase in standards compliance of 75.7% from the year ago tests. [via the big orange Z]

poopy — Fri, 06 Sep 2002 06:51:07 -0800

99.9% of Websites Are Obsolete An excerpt from an upcoming book by Mr. Zeldman in which he continues to argue the practice of standards compliance - "Held up as a Holy Grail of professional development practice, backward compatibility sounds good in theory. But the cost is too high and the practice has always been based on a lie." I enjoy his writing but he seems to be repeating himself as usual. Still, it is a good argument: where do we focus our priorities for future development - pure standards compliant CSS models, backwards compatibility, or somewhere in between? I know this has been discussed before but thought it postworthy due to the new book and all.

gazingus — Tue, 11 Jun 2002 09:04:15 -0800

The Web Standards Project is back, now in easy-to-swallow blog form. Stand up straight! Close that HTML tag! And wipe that silly browser off your hard drive, mister! And the other one.

patricking — Tue, 08 Jan 2002 03:03:43 -0800

web developer's guide to AOL. just in case you've ever wondered what their standards really are (well, yeah, neither have i, but...).

Steven Den Beste — Tue, 08 May 2001 21:10:34 -0800

Disenchanted comments on the "Web Standards Project" and he disagrees with it. And I think what he says rings true: "There's no point in hanging a 'No Shirt, No Shoes, No Service' sign outside a web site."

geir — Thu, 22 Feb 2001 04:09:24 -0800

A spectre is haunting the Web - the spectre of standards. Jeffery Zeldman takes a bold step and stops supporting "bad browsers". Will the Web follow?

patricking — Sat, 18 Nov 2000 13:39:09 -0800

what will be supported now that browsers are a-changin' again? handy resource from a Netscape product manager.

Zeldman — Mon, 10 Apr 2000 06:16:53 -0800

The Web Standards Project blasts Microsoft's "arrogant" break with standards in IE 5.5/Windows Edition. Please read the press release and, if you agree, post it to your favorite mailing lists and news groups. This must not stand.