3 ms·

“How unreasonable is it to demand a certain degree of professionalism from the w3c? All I want is to point people to the w3c when they have any intentions of fi

by nsfmc 16y ago

“How unreasonable is it to demand a certain degree of professionalism from the w3c? All I want is to point people to the w3c when they have any intentions of finding out more about html, css, javascript, accessibility or whatever other front-end related topic, without feeling embarrassed to do so or without putting those people off before they even started?” So the problem is that the w3c is obtuse and hard to use as a lay person, but also that their most recent moves to improve their image do nothing for improving the author's sales pitch for standards-based web technologies, which, let's be honest, is not really their job[1] To be fair, the w3c is a bit obtuse, but it's also not an educational outreach organization, it's a standards body that makes recommendations (and the recommendations are actually targeted towards browser implementers first, and end-users second). I don't think the author or his clients are really their target audience. [1]: http://www.w3.org/Help/#compliant http://www.w3.org/Help/#compliant

earnubs 16y ago
I agree with you, the W3C mainly wrote specifications for implementors (which is why as a front end person you must read the spec and 'read' the implementation of it in the browser) and the role of talking to authors was left to those who write books. But the W3C has made efforts with the HTML5 specs to speak directly to web authors [1] and is now engaged in this badge outreach. So, while I find most of the original post to be a bit garbled and unfocused I think that if the W3C is now going to be speaking to authors it does need a little bit of a tidy up, perhaps a small garden of documents for authors that easily navigable with some more verbose explanations of what and where these documents sit in the master plan. Also a little bit of history wouldn't go amiss, the W3C didn't write the HTML5 spec, it co-opted it from the WHATWG after admitting that XHML2 wasn't going to fly. I think it's important to understand the history and understand the relationship between bodies like the W3C and WHATWG etc, browsers vendors and the author. The W3C has it's place, but it's not as important as most authors think it to be. [1] http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec-author-view/ http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec-author-view/
- onderhond 16y ago
  Whatever the w3c would like to be, there is a different reality, namely what people perceive them to be. Client, back-end programmers and other non-front-end people alike look to the w3c when it comes to front-end. And seeing they've just launched a community site built around a silly logo, I'm sure they are a tad more than a simple standards body. If they are not happy with their public image, it's up to them to make it clear (and not through a few paragraphs on their oh-so-usable site).

by nsfmc 16y ago

earnubs 16y ago

I agree with you, the W3C mainly wrote specifications for implementors (which is why as a front end person you must read the spec and 'read' the implementation of it in the browser) and the role of talking to authors was left to those who write books. But the W3C has made efforts with the HTML5 specs to speak directly to web authors [1] and is now engaged in this badge outreach. So, while I find most of the original post to be a bit garbled and unfocused I think that if the W3C is now going to be speaking to authors it does need a little bit of a tidy up, perhaps a small garden of documents for authors that easily navigable with some more verbose explanations of what and where these documents sit in the master plan. Also a little bit of history wouldn't go amiss, the W3C didn't write the HTML5 spec, it co-opted it from the WHATWG after admitting that XHML2 wasn't going to fly. I think it's important to understand the history and understand the relationship between bodies like the W3C and WHATWG etc, browsers vendors and the author. The W3C has it's place, but it's not as important as most authors think it to be. [1] http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec-author-view/ http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec-author-view/

onderhond 16y ago
Whatever the w3c would like to be, there is a different reality, namely what people perceive them to be. Client, back-end programmers and other non-front-end people alike look to the w3c when it comes to front-end. And seeing they've just launched a community site built around a silly logo, I'm sure they are a tad more than a simple standards body. If they are not happy with their public image, it's up to them to make it clear (and not through a few paragraphs on their oh-so-usable site).