Skip to main content

Why I hate the W3C (or) Why I hate Blogger (or) Why I hate both

From the W3C site:
"The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) develops interoperable
technologies (specifications, guidelines, software, and tools) to lead
the Web to its full potential."

Blogger is what you're reading this page on. It publishes your thoughts through the Web, so a lot of people can read them.

Now that I have formally introduced both of them, I will talk about the problems I have with both of them.

 


Problem 1


When I try to hit a newline in blogger, it assumes I'm a noob and inserts a <br/> in place.

Now, when I happen to insert a few newlines (\n) in a list for my own readability, it converts them to something like:
</li><br/><li>

which isn't really okay with the W3C XHTML transitional validator. Hmmmph! Now how about that?

 


Problem 2


The blogger templates are written sometimes with <p> so according to the W3C, there are problems nesting block level elements in it. Now I being a normal user introduce a paragraph because I think that would help people read my posts better. And I also want lots of people to be able to read it. I assume that the system works well by default. According to the W3C, some browsers are stupid, and would fail to render your document tree structure. Especially in the mobile browsers. Now this is so messed up.

 


Problem 3


The conversion to XHTML has typically been a kind of Arab and Camel story for me. So, being a kind arab, I have often tried to keep quiet when the W3C camel discouraged me from using <center> and <b> tags: the two tags that could make all the difference to me, in HTML. I haven't fought back when it said I couldn't arbitrarily nest elements. I mean, browsers and DOM!! WTF?!!!

Now, the camel came into the tent' and told me I had to escape links with queries in them:

<a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=XML+CDATA&amp;oe=utf-8">
XML CDATA
</a>

and that's when I got pissed off and decided to kick the camel.

Invalid XHTML 1.0 Transitional

 

Comments

Vaishnavi said…
Relax buddy.
I hope W3C takes note of it.
Arab and Camel fable analogy was good,the only difference you,the kind Arab knocking the Camel ;)

There is always a scope for improvement :).

My sugestion:Change templete

Popular posts from this blog

Is Free Software really Free? (A case of Google Android and Java)

Update: Google has open sourced Android and I will take back what I said. If you still wish to read the post, you may do so.

A lot of people have asked me why anybody would want free software, because there is no support or commercial licensing usually. Let me define what free is supposed to mean: "The freedom given to a user to execute the program; to modify the source code, compile and execute the modified program; to be able to redistribute the modified source code and the modified program."

We are not here to discuss if everybody is giving you a false free software promise, or if being "good" is essential for our life, but only to discuss a particular false software promise by organizations like Sun and Google.

Let us take a classic example: the Java platform. While Sun has been (for years) trying to free Java, they still can't push in just enough to make it completely free. And when they did GPL their OpenJDK (which at the moment, is probably mostly unhinder…

Staring into the Abyss

Automation is the new buzzword. People are losing jobs like crazy. The hunger games have started  and now everyone is being forced to feed the croniest capitalists in the world. The beautiful gig economy has lost its sheen and has turned into nothing but a mere bargaining game in every market.

So where does that leave us? Into the abyss of irrelevance.


The abyss of irrelevance: Where many people need not work, many people need not apply and yet they will be forced to work because most common resources would have been squatted on by the rich and the powerful.

For every economy that needs a person to make and sell, we have a machine. But who is going to buy it? Another machine?

Is Communism is going to show it's head again? It will be interesting to watch.

Simulations, Universes and Possibilities

There has been a lot more thought now on why our universe is nothing more than a sophisticated video game.

I have often thought about it as such, and I have likened light to be the medium of energy and information transfer in our Universe. I would think gravity and forces were caused by light information travelling to particles, causing them to move accordingly.


Now, according to me, it is hard to go back in time and jump into the future, expecting the Universe to compute all of these events quickly enough. Why, you may ask? Because it indeed takes a long time to compute your own life, one dependency at a time and one living entity at a time. Otherwise, Life would only be throwing coarsely accurate but completely random events at us than the true, perfectly accurate simulated future.




Now, time is pretty relative to who computes it. There are some frames in life, where when nobody's observing anything, the Universe could go on a rampage and advance our timelines rapidly. On t…