W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > October 1999

Re: What is "validation"?

From: Uriel Wittenberg <uw@urielw.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 23:59:38 -0400
Message-ID: <37FEBDAA.149B2BDC@urielw.com>
To: W3C Validator <www-validator@w3.org>
CC: Ann Navarro <ann@webgeek.com>
Ann Navarro wrote:

> At 01:33 PM 10/8/99 -0400, Uriel Wittenberg wrote:
> >Your question is awkward, because the correct answer involves
> contradicting the
> >angry Kynn.
> Nothing in Kynn's responses qualify as "angry" Uriel, perhaps a little
> projection is occuring here?
> Someone can disagree with you, and argue against your position without
> being "angry". It's not the fault of the person arguing if you project that
> into anger.
> Ann
> ---
> Author of:  Effective Web Design: Master the Essentials
> 10/99 - Mastering XML, 12/99 - HTML By Example, 2nd. Ed.
> Founder, WebGeek Communications            http://www.webgeek.com
> Vice President-Finance, HTML Writers Guild http://www.hwg.org
> Director, HWG Online Education             http://www.hwg.org/services/classes

It may be news to members of this mailing list, but the dissembling style
exemplified by the Kynn/Ann duet is standard fare on the
comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html (CIWAH) newsgroup. The routine has one of the
CIWAH urchins unleashing a wholly unreasonable attack on an unsuspecting visitor
posing an innocent query. If the visitor protests, he is then swarmed by a whole
bevy of thugs -- the regulars.

A few of these characters are aptly described at
http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/2760/ciwah.html ("CIWAH - The Internet's
Freak Show"). I have studied that webpage assiduously and can vouch for its total

Despite her wide-eyed denial, Ann is of course fully aware of Kynn's churlishness,
which has been repeatedly displayed in the last few days. (Even if she's not on
the list, it's in the list archives for anyone to see.) But being a practiced
liar, she slyly speaks of "projection" on my part, and she assumes an
ultra-reasonable tone as she insinuates for the benefit of third parties (who
typically haven't paid much attention to the discussion) that I lose control when
people disagree with me.

Is it even worth speculating on the Kynn/Ann relationship? They may simply be
gangster chums, sharing malicious joy as they coordinate newsgroup ambushes. Or
perhaps there's a business tie: he pushes her book, she pushes his consulting
service, each concocts phony job references for the other. Perhaps they conjoin in
some symbiotic manner to jointly nurse their unfathomable complexes. Conceivably
they have formed a hair-raising physical intimacy that one could not begin to
describe in a family mailing list such as this.

Whatever goes on behind their closed doors, the hypocrisy is on record in the
archives for any psychiatrist, or perhaps anthropologist, to analyze. Students of
the boor type will note the presence of concomitant traits: the thin skin, the
inability to acknowledge error, the tendency to hysteria.

This is my first off-topic message here, and I intend to resist the further
provocations that are likely to ensue. But please observe that the CIWAH problem
highlighted here is far from irrelevant to W3C and others concerned about
standards. The W3C site directs visitors to CIWAH for HTML advice. Standardization
does not benefit when people seeking help with compliance are handed over to that
band of misfits.

What's needed is a moderated discussion group that the world can turn to for HTML
advice. Moderation does not have to involve a lot of effort. I have some specific
ideas on fair ways to institute this, and I'd be prepared to discuss helping W3C
set it up if they're interested.

Received on Friday, 8 October 1999 23:57:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 14:17:25 UTC