21–30 of 138 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is sickening-grade bikeshedding. Next time, spare us, and say it to your rubber duck instead.
I hope he doesn't look at HN HTML code.
Edit to answer "how is it invalid": is this not enough? http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.ycombina...
Back in 2012 when I was sure I wanted to master some dialect of Lisp but wasn't sure which one yet, I read about 80% of Practical Common Lisp before I noped the heck out of there. The whole reason I was drawn to Lisp was for its semantic and syntactic purity, simplicity, and consistency, and out of the three popular Lisps at the time, CL felt like it had these the least. Ultimately I ended up going with Clojure after…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is sickening-grade bikeshedding. Next time, spare us, and say it to your rubber duck instead.
Did you just register to say that? Hilarious. I'd always laughed at "developers" that can't even arrange their own websites properly and still try to educate us about what's acceptable and what is not. Don't know a thing about web design? Use a ready-made blogging platform then, not a school-grade HTML4 style-less nonsense. No one forces you to roll your own solution every single time. But heck, even a simple Bootstr…
There are lots of good articles on there, but the site uses frames. Does that detract from the quality of the content? No.
Paul Graham's site: http://www.paulgraham.com/
Has a HTML 4.01 Transitional doctype and uses tables for layouts. Does that detract from the content? No.
Hell, you're on hacker news. It doesn't even define a doctype and also uses tables for layouts.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is sickening-grade bikeshedding. Next time, spare us, and say it to your rubber duck instead.
Did you just register to say that? Hilarious. I'd always laughed at "developers" that can't even arrange their own websites properly and still try to educate us about what's acceptable and what is not. Don't know a thing about web design? Use a ready-made blogging platform then, not a school-grade HTML4 style-less nonsense. No one forces you to roll your own solution every single time. But heck, even a simple Bootstr…
When I opened the page, I honestly thought CSS failed to load. But then I looked at the first line of the page source: I think they really shouldn't tell us what is now an acceptable scripting language if they still consider that design and that doctype acceptable in 2016.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I feel as though this is at least somewhat relevant: http://motherfuckingwebsite.com
Then surely, so is this http://bettermotherfuckingwebsite.com/
When I opened the page, I honestly thought CSS failed to load. But then I looked at the first line of the page source: I think they really shouldn't tell us what is now an acceptable scripting language if they still consider that design and that doctype acceptable in 2016.
When I opened the page, I honestly thought CSS failed to load. But then I looked at the first line of the page source: I think they really shouldn't tell us what is now an acceptable scripting language if they still consider that design and that doctype acceptable in 2016.
I'm not sure why that would call the contents into question.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Did you just register to say that? Hilarious. I'd always laughed at "developers" that can't even arrange their own websites properly and still try to educate us about what's acceptable and what is not. Don't know a thing about web design? Use a ready-made blogging platform then, not a school-grade HTML4 style-less nonsense. No one forces you to roll your own solution every single time. But heck, even a simple Bootstr…
This is the website of John Walker, cofounder of Autodesk: https://www.fourmilab.ch/ There are lots of good articles on there, but the site uses frames. Does that detract from the quality of the content? No. Paul Graham's site: http://www.paulgraham.com/ Has a HTML 4.01 Transitional doctype and uses tables for layouts. Does that detract from the content? No. Hell, you're on hacker news. It doesn't even define a docty…
> This is the website of John Walker, cofounder of Autodesk
If he's a cofounder of Autodesk and can't make a decent website himself, how hard would it be to pay someone who can?
> Paul Graham's site
Even worse than the former. Someone, stop that pain, tell him finally how to adjust screen resolution over 640x480!
> Does that detract from the quality of the content?
Yes. It shows the real attitude to the target audience.
> Hell, you're on hacker news. It doesn't even define a doctype and also uses tables for layouts.
Correct, but at least it has some CSS and doesn't look like a hello-from-nineties.