4 ms·

1. http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.ycombinator.com&charset=%28detect+automatically%29&doctype=Inline&group=0 http://validator.w3.org/check?u

by dcurtis 19y ago

1. http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.ycombinator.com&charset=%28detect+automatically%29&doctype=Inline&group=0 http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.ycombina... 2. Ill admit defeat on this point. (but see below) 3. With all the td, tr, etc tags, it seems messy. I don't know for sure, but I think using a stylesheet could reduce the size. I'll code hacker news in CSS when I have a few minutes and try to get the HTML+CSS under 30k. Relatively, its a small site. That's awesome because it loads fast and I can comment using my treo, like I am now. Thanks for spending so much energy on speed. But if it can be smaller by using CSS, I think that's a reason to switch. Don't you? Anyway, regarding source/object code, I don't mean to disagree with you. I'm just saying that HTML was designed to be looked at and Hacker News disregards all of the convention there. I guess that's okay, its just extremely unusual.

pg 19y ago
You're changing the question on 1. Obviously whether or not I use tables is a separate question from whether the HTML I generate conforms exactly to the spec. As for speed, no: when you've got a site down to 30k, you shouldn't be spending time making it smaller. Are you sure HTML was designed to be looked at? I thought it was a subset of SGML, which as far as I know was a portable representation for the kind of documents that would ordinarily be seen with a WYSYWG editor. But even if HTML had been designed to be manipulated by hand, the general trend in technology is always away from that. Machine language was designed to be looked at. Then technology advanced and people started using programs to generate it.
- dcurtis 19y ago
  My point on 1 wasn't specific to tables. Hacker News genuinely ignores W3C standards. Are you saying that the future of HTML looks like what happened to machine language?

by dcurtis 19y ago

pg 19y ago

You're changing the question on 1. Obviously whether or not I use tables is a separate question from whether the HTML I generate conforms exactly to the spec. As for speed, no: when you've got a site down to 30k, you shouldn't be spending time making it smaller. Are you sure HTML was designed to be looked at? I thought it was a subset of SGML, which as far as I know was a portable representation for the kind of documents that would ordinarily be seen with a WYSYWG editor. But even if HTML had been designed to be manipulated by hand, the general trend in technology is always away from that. Machine language was designed to be looked at. Then technology advanced and people started using programs to generate it.

dcurtis 19y ago
My point on 1 wasn't specific to tables. Hacker News genuinely ignores W3C standards. Are you saying that the future of HTML looks like what happened to machine language?