RE: uri=referer

I mostly agree with Jukka on this issue. Most people I know have no clue what HTML means. My "eye opening" experience came when working with a student on a web site. I had assumed since he was a teenager practically addicted to the web that he would know everything there was to know about the web. He barely knew how to view the source of the web page. When asked about it his reply was that "he uses the web, but he doesn't design it." Quite a bit like a car where most people have no idea how it works, they just drive it.

Anyway, no one outside the web design community really knows what HTML is or why it needs to be valid. Personally I see the extra icon as a distraction to a nicely designed web site. You won't find it on most professional web sites.

HOWEVER, I can think of at least one reason the W3C might want the icons... Google Page Rank is increased for the W3C by the use of the link back to their site.

--Doug



-----Original Message-----
From: www-validator-css-request@w3.org [mailto:www-validator-css-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Krzysztof Zelechowski
Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 7:34 AM
To: Jukka K. Korpela
Cc: www-validator-css@w3.org
Subject: Re: uri=referer

Dnia 2008-05-14, śro o godzinie 17:57 +0300, Jukka K. Korpela pisze:
> olivier Thereaux wrote:
> 
> > On 14-May-08, at 1:56 PM, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:

> > Your opinion on the icons are here, stated, and archived. Many times.
> > Everyone respects your opinion.
> 
> I don't think so. Respect would be shown by adequately addressing the 
> _arguments_ I have presented (collected at 
> http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/html/validation.html#icon ). Prove them 
> wrong, or agree with them and draw the conclusions, but please don't 
> tell me you respect my opinion when you ignore it without saying why.

Received on Thursday, 15 May 2008 12:57:32 UTC