W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > February 2001

RE: Point of order!

From: Cavre <cavre@mindspring.com>
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 11:31:01 -0400
Message-ID: <200102071131010490.0093E299@smtp.mindspring.com>
To: www-html@w3.org
I am sorry, but all this talk about standards compliance is 
to be dead honest is absurd. As much as I would like to 
see standard compliance across the board it's just a impossibility
for many valid reason.

The major reason is cost.  It's expensive to bring
any code up to standard when it's far easier and
cheaper to deliver the absolute minimum code necessary
to deliver the information desired.  Remember YOUR
not paying the bandwidth bill.  In most cases the website
owner is.  If you want standard compliance then fine.
Let me pass on the $12,000 bandwidth bill or so I pay
each month on to you. DW mentioned a few months back
or so about adding just 4 lines to HTML code.  Yea ok 
those 4 lines would end up costing me about $100 to 
$200 a month.  I would bet anything he would be rather
annoyed if every website owner sent him a bill for his 
4 measly little lines. 

XML and XHTML is more expensive to deliver than HTML
especially if you want to follow W3C standards.  And besides
why bother.  W3C members don't even follow their own 
standards.  So why should I and often time I cannot because
W3C members do not.  What's the purpose or the point.
Tell ya what why not get all W3C members to follow their own
standards as they have set them or they are not allowed to 
be W3C members.  Opps I forgot my apologies.  W3C 
ONLY makes recommendations.  They are not a standards
organization.  Hmmm  ok why do they exist at all.  Probably
because the members just need a tax write off. Ok that makes
some sense.  But if companies do need a tax write off I would
much rather see them invest in education.  That always pays
for itself in the long run.  And yes many companies spend
a fortune in education today.  By the same token they also
waste money in areas that it would be better spent. The 
question is are the recommendations (standards to me)
worth the time and money spent to develop them.

Look I know this letter may get you riled up. GOOD.  Now
simmer down about 20 degrees and really think about the 
practicality of what your asking.  Five years from now, maybe
seven.  Ok then it's definitely doable and I would be more
than willing to support that issue.  But not right now.
Has anyone look at the market these days.  The net is 
really suffering.  Websites are going down faster than
economy is.  The Internet is no longer a fad.  This is the
time we must tighten our belts and figure out how to pay
for all of this.  It was easy in the early days.  Now it's 
far tougher to stay ahead and keep afloat. 

Hey I like W3C recommendations.  I admire everything
that they and the members have accomplished. BUT!!!
In the end as a business owner I must consider my 
bottom line. PERIOD.  I have a few small investors
that demand a profit to be made.  I have web site
owners that demand that I reduce the cost
to deliver their web site.  And if this means I must 
break W3C recommendations to do so well. Hey 
I have wife, kids, a home to pay for just like most 
people.  So W3C recommendations suddenly become
meaningless.  I do what it takes to make that profit.
The almighty dollar is just stronger than any organization.
This is reality people sorry no offense, but that is just 
real life.  And unlike Bill Gates and many others I have not
made my fortune yet and probably never will.  I like many
other are just trying to earn a living the best I can. 

Yes I agree that the cost of bandwidth has come down.
Yes I agree the cost of maintance is far cheaper today
then it was several years ago.  But that trend does not
match the additions and requirements for good web site
design and execution.  MORE, MORE,  MORE is the the
cry of the web site viewer.  And those of us who are designing
and have been designing web sites for a number years have
struggled to keep up with the demand and still provide good
quality code and web sites. Not always following W3C recommendations.
Sometimes you just can't.  The cost is just simply too high
or the browser development companies simply do not or will
support in full W3C recommendations.

I read where Scott complained about Netscape 6.0.  Yet he
uses NETZero as his supplier.  My first question that I must
ask is he paying for anything?  I don't honestly know, but if
your getting something for free why are you complaining at 
all? If the service is that bad then do like the rest of us and get a real
ISP.  That's pretty simple.  Not that NetZero is not good service
but if they are providing a service for free than NetZero or any
company like them can certainly set their own standards since
they are picking up the cost of the service.  You pay for what
you get.  It's as simple as that.  Don't complain if your getting
it for free.  Because one day you might not get it at all.

The W3C desperately needs to separate into two different 
groups.  Took me the longest time realize this.  One strictly
designed for business and one that is more geared towards
the education institutions.  The business group can concentrate
on the best way to deliver solid content, with reliable service, at
the most affordable level.  Where as the developmental group
and can push the forefront of web based technologies,  cutting
edge development.  From that the business group can pull the 
technologies it needs to run well and efficiently.  

Consider the benefits.  I would bet anything Microsoft, Netscape,
and many other companies would endorse such a division and support
both groups in W3C.  The only requirement would be that if your a 
member of the business group than you must meet recommendations
set by that group.  This is for software integration.  Legacy would 
certainly be a issue.  Where as in the education group there are 
no limits.  Anything goes.  You can not develop cutting edge software
with your hands tied behind your back. Let the chips fall where they
may. In this manner DW can still have his 4 little lines where as I can 
toss them as needed.  {chuckles - and my bank account will be much 
happier too.}

To Dustin - 

I agree with everything you have said and will work towards those issues.
However until I get there my suggestion is to push in the clutch firmly, move
the gear shift to the next gear, step on the gas moderately, and release the 
clutch slowly.  If the engine dies then come to a complete stop in a safe 
environment and out of the way of on coming traffic. Then restart 
your motor per the instruction manual provide to you.  Please note that 
bandwidth is a necessary item and must be available and accessable 
before attempting any restart.

(grins)

Hopefully it will not take 40 or 50 years to develop a automatic transmission 
(or the some similar device) to make your web based driving experience 
easier and more enjoyable. Also it is strongly recommended that all drivers 
receive some education in some form by some agency before driving on the
web.  In some cases a licence may need to be purchase before you may 
access the superhighway. 

Disclaimer - Please take this letter in the light hearted manner it has been delivered in.  
No offense is intended or desired to any company, corporation, or individual
listed here.  All comments made are merely the opinions and view of the author
signed below. And yes he will probably be crucified for them. Please note that
you have only received a copy and as such is not valid in any legal court of 
any type, in any country.  This document may not be used in legal manner as
the owner has not digitally signed or in any form authorized that this copy is 
valid and up to date.  Only the copy contained on the author's backups or hard
drive may be considered the original. And yes I have been sued for things I have
said hence this disclaimer.  

Cavre


  

  
  




 
Received on Wednesday, 7 February 2001 11:41:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:45 GMT