Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

XHTML Club

xhtml.club

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 131 posts

Re: XHTML Club

#101

Post by assimpleaspossi »

cxr wrote: post #99
assimpleaspossi wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>It's impossible because the current edition is very obviously not HTML5. I find it interesting to read that you are agreeing with my entire point while insulting me and arguing that I am wrong.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moving_the_goalposts > ---- > There is no HTML5. It's just a buzzword. > [HTML5]'s not a technical term. > Telling them HTML5 does exist does even more harm cause it doesn't exist. Telling them it does exist is entirely wrong and is even a false statement > there is no HTML5 standard Source: Literally all you, here, in this thread. If you want to switch gears now and try rewrite the reco…

You took things out of context. You aren't following along to what I replied to. The person I replied to said, "...so these days it's actually HTML5." And, in response to "these days", I said there is no HTML5. Which is true and you agree with.

So did the other guy. Thanks to you all for your support for web standards.

Re: XHTML Club

#102

Post by [deleted] »

assimpleaspossi wrote: post #101
cxr wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moving_the_goalposts > ---- > There is no HTML5. It's just a buzzword. > [HTML5]'s not a technical term. > Telling them HTML5 does exist does even more harm cause it doesn't exist. Telling them it does exist is entirely wrong and is even a false statement > there is no HTML5 standard Source: Literally all you, here, in this thread. If you want to switch gears now and try rewrite the reco…

You took things out of context. You aren't following along to what I replied to. The person I replied to said, "...so these days it's actually HTML5." And, in response to "these days", I said there is no HTML5. Which is true and you agree with. So did the other guy. Thanks to you all for your support for web standards.

[deleted]

Re: XHTML Club

#103

Post by cxr »

assimpleaspossi wrote: post #101
cxr wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moving_the_goalposts > ---- > There is no HTML5. It's just a buzzword. > [HTML5]'s not a technical term. > Telling them HTML5 does exist does even more harm cause it doesn't exist. Telling them it does exist is entirely wrong and is even a false statement > there is no HTML5 standard Source: Literally all you, here, in this thread. If you want to switch gears now and try rewrite the reco…

You took things out of context. You aren't following along to what I replied to. The person I replied to said, "...so these days it's actually HTML5." And, in response to "these days", I said there is no HTML5. Which is true and you agree with. So did the other guy. Thanks to you all for your support for web standards.

Basic truth: if you can't manage to accurately summarize your counterparty's position in a statement that ends with "you agree with " and have that person agree that that's their position rather than feeling compelled to call you out as an intellectually dishonest sack of shit, then they don't actually agree with you, it's more than likely to be an accurate charge against you, and you should knock it off immediately.

> I said there is no HTML5. Which is true and you agree with.

No, I don't.

Re: XHTML Club

#104

Post by assimpleaspossi »

cxr wrote: post #103
assimpleaspossi wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You took things out of context. You aren't following along to what I replied to. The person I replied to said, "...so these days it's actually HTML5." And, in response to "these days", I said there is no HTML5. Which is true and you agree with. So did the other guy. Thanks to you all for your support for web standards.

Basic truth: if you can't manage to accurately summarize your counterparty's position in a statement that ends with "you agree with " and have that person agree that that's their position rather than feeling compelled to call you out as an intellectually dishonest sack of shit, then they don't actually agree with you, it's more than likely to be an accurate charge against you, and you should knock it off immediately.…

Well, I can judge the quality of person you are by your comments and see you aren't worth talking to so I'll leave you in your misery.

Re: XHTML Club

#105

Post by [deleted] »

assimpleaspossi wrote: post #101
cxr wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moving_the_goalposts > ---- > There is no HTML5. It's just a buzzword. > [HTML5]'s not a technical term. > Telling them HTML5 does exist does even more harm cause it doesn't exist. Telling them it does exist is entirely wrong and is even a false statement > there is no HTML5 standard Source: Literally all you, here, in this thread. If you want to switch gears now and try rewrite the reco…

You took things out of context. You aren't following along to what I replied to. The person I replied to said, "...so these days it's actually HTML5." And, in response to "these days", I said there is no HTML5. Which is true and you agree with. So did the other guy. Thanks to you all for your support for web standards.

[deleted]

Re: XHTML Club

#106

Post by throwaway150 »

assimpleaspossi wrote: post #104
cxr wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Basic truth: if you can't manage to accurately summarize your counterparty's position in a statement that ends with "you agree with " and have that person agree that that's their position rather than feeling compelled to call you out as an intellectually dishonest sack of shit, then they don't actually agree with you, it's more than likely to be an accurate charge against you, and you should knock it off immediately.…

Well, I can judge the quality of person you are by your comments and see you aren't worth talking to so I'll leave you in your misery.

Don't move the goalposts and take this as an opportunity to learn from the feedback you are receiving from several people here. Perhaps learn to be more accurate in what you say and if you fail to be accurate (which happens to everyone, we are all humans), admit it gracefully, and move on.

Your original claim was:

> There is no HTML5.

Clearly false because it exists: https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/introduction.html#is-...

Then you move the goalpost.

> Please point to any current edition of the HTML standard that is titled HTML5 published by WHATWG or the W3C.

But who said anything about "current edition"? Only you did. The fact that the current edition is not HTML 5 does not mean that the HTML 5 standard has stopped existing!

Re: XHTML Club

#107

Post by assimpleaspossi »

throwaway150 wrote: post #106
assimpleaspossi wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I can judge the quality of person you are by your comments and see you aren't worth talking to so I'll leave you in your misery.

Don't move the goalposts and take this as an opportunity to learn from the feedback you are receiving from several people here. Perhaps learn to be more accurate in what you say and if you fail to be accurate (which happens to everyone, we are all humans), admit it gracefully, and move on. Your original claim was: > There is no HTML5. Clearly false because it exists: https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/introductio…

The poster I replied to did. You're like the other guy who jumped into a thread without following the context. Technical people know better than to do that. But I'm not here to teach people how to follow a thread. Please don't reply. I'm done here

Re: XHTML Club

#108

Post by [deleted] »

assimpleaspossi wrote: post #104
cxr wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Basic truth: if you can't manage to accurately summarize your counterparty's position in a statement that ends with "you agree with " and have that person agree that that's their position rather than feeling compelled to call you out as an intellectually dishonest sack of shit, then they don't actually agree with you, it's more than likely to be an accurate charge against you, and you should knock it off immediately.…

Well, I can judge the quality of person you are by your comments and see you aren't worth talking to so I'll leave you in your misery.

[deleted]

Re: XHTML Club

#109

Post by [deleted] »

assimpleaspossi wrote: post #107
throwaway150 wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't move the goalposts and take this as an opportunity to learn from the feedback you are receiving from several people here. Perhaps learn to be more accurate in what you say and if you fail to be accurate (which happens to everyone, we are all humans), admit it gracefully, and move on. Your original claim was: > There is no HTML5. Clearly false because it exists: https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/introductio…

The poster I replied to did. You're like the other guy who jumped into a thread without following the context. Technical people know better than to do that. But I'm not here to teach people how to follow a thread. Please don't reply. I'm done here

[deleted]

Re: XHTML Club

#110

Post by throwaway150 »

assimpleaspossi wrote: post #107
throwaway150 wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't move the goalposts and take this as an opportunity to learn from the feedback you are receiving from several people here. Perhaps learn to be more accurate in what you say and if you fail to be accurate (which happens to everyone, we are all humans), admit it gracefully, and move on. Your original claim was: > There is no HTML5. Clearly false because it exists: https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/introductio…

The poster I replied to did. You're like the other guy who jumped into a thread without following the context. Technical people know better than to do that. But I'm not here to teach people how to follow a thread. Please don't reply. I'm done here

> You're like the other guy who jumped into a thread without following the context. Technical people know better than to do that. But I'm not here to teach people how to follow a thread.

Can you stop being so antagonistic already? I have been following this whole thread since afternoon. We both began commenting on this post at about the same time. I regret to say that I have wasted my whole afternoon and evening on this thread. So regrettably I have been following the context very closely actually.

Most of your subsequent comments make sense but they also keep moving the goalpost which is frustrating. I mean it is easy to be correct if you constantly keep moving the goalpost. But we must go back to where this nuisance began. It began at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46743683 when you said:

> There is no HTML5.

Do you admit that your orginal claim "There is no HTML5." was incorrect? If you don't admit that do you also think HTML 4.01 standard has stopped existing? What about C89? Has that also stopped existing? Just because there are newer standards and living standards, it doesn't mean that the old standards have stopped existing.

Post reply on HN