It's horrible
-
HTML :(( Please, who decided that tags like
didn't have to be closed. Now parsers have to waste their time checking for a closing tag. Also, how could people think that is ok? And what about? And what about JavaScript and the like? Why consider ' and " only within a script tag, and then allow <, but outside a script tag treat any instance of < as a tag opener? People's laziness in writing HTML slows down my computer by wasting processing. But seriously, why did people decide that HTMLers would be too stupid/lazy to close tags and layer them correctly?
My favourite part was when the OP forgot to tick the "Ignore HTML tags in this message (good for code snippets) checkbox!!
-------------------------------------------------------- Knowledge is knowing that the tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it in fruit salad!!
-
HTML :(( Please, who decided that tags like
didn't have to be closed. Now parsers have to waste their time checking for a closing tag. Also, how could people think that is ok? And what about? And what about JavaScript and the like? Why consider ' and " only within a script tag, and then allow <, but outside a script tag treat any instance of < as a tag opener? People's laziness in writing HTML slows down my computer by wasting processing. But seriously, why did people decide that HTMLers would be too stupid/lazy to close tags and layer them correctly?
<b><i></i></b> Looks OK to me. :confused:
-
<b><i></i></b> Looks OK to me. :confused:
-
HTML :(( Please, who decided that tags like
didn't have to be closed. Now parsers have to waste their time checking for a closing tag. Also, how could people think that is ok? And what about? And what about JavaScript and the like? Why consider ' and " only within a script tag, and then allow <, but outside a script tag treat any instance of < as a tag opener? People's laziness in writing HTML slows down my computer by wasting processing. But seriously, why did people decide that HTMLers would be too stupid/lazy to close tags and layer them correctly?
Actually, that is what makes the web so great. By lowering the barrier to entry it let many people without technical skills get information out. If we raise the level of skill to put out a simple web page, then we'll leave some people out. Anybody that likes and gets serious will want to get better to do more complex things. Or they'll get a copy of Frontpage (or something like that). Hogan
-
Actually, that is what makes the web so great. By lowering the barrier to entry it let many people without technical skills get information out. If we raise the level of skill to put out a simple web page, then we'll leave some people out. Anybody that likes and gets serious will want to get better to do more complex things. Or they'll get a copy of Frontpage (or something like that). Hogan
-
HTML :(( Please, who decided that tags like
didn't have to be closed. Now parsers have to waste their time checking for a closing tag. Also, how could people think that is ok? And what about? And what about JavaScript and the like? Why consider ' and " only within a script tag, and then allow <, but outside a script tag treat any instance of < as a tag opener? People's laziness in writing HTML slows down my computer by wasting processing. But seriously, why did people decide that HTMLers would be too stupid/lazy to close tags and layer them correctly?
jamie550 wrote:
Also, how could people think that is ok?
Because when applying that formatting in your favorite word processor you only need to apply bold and italic once each. You don;t have to apply one separately on each side of the other. Having learned how to do the task one way, a user will always try to do a conceptually similar task the same way in other applications.
Today's lesson is brought to you by the word "niggardly". Remember kids, don't attribute to racism what can be explained by Scandinavian language roots. -- Robert Royall
-
My favourite part was when the OP forgot to tick the "Ignore HTML tags in this message (good for code snippets) checkbox!!
-------------------------------------------------------- Knowledge is knowing that the tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it in fruit salad!!
:doh: :laugh:
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer "Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
-
jamie550 wrote:
Also, how could people think that is ok?
Because when applying that formatting in your favorite word processor you only need to apply bold and italic once each. You don;t have to apply one separately on each side of the other. Having learned how to do the task one way, a user will always try to do a conceptually similar task the same way in other applications.
Today's lesson is brought to you by the word "niggardly". Remember kids, don't attribute to racism what can be explained by Scandinavian language roots. -- Robert Royall
dan neely wrote:
Because when applying that formatting in your favorite word processor you only need to apply bold and italic once each. You don;t have to apply one separately on each side of the other. Having learned how to do the task one way, a user will always try to do a conceptually similar task the same way in other applications.
This is not true, in WordPerfect For DOS you must start a Bold section and then close the bold section. The same for italic and underline. ;P
Learn from the mistakes of others, you may not live long enough to make them all yourself.
-
dan neely wrote:
Because when applying that formatting in your favorite word processor you only need to apply bold and italic once each. You don;t have to apply one separately on each side of the other. Having learned how to do the task one way, a user will always try to do a conceptually similar task the same way in other applications.
This is not true, in WordPerfect For DOS you must start a Bold section and then close the bold section. The same for italic and underline. ;P
Learn from the mistakes of others, you may not live long enough to make them all yourself.
Which would mean that the 5% of lusers who learned word processing on WP would get it right, but the 95% whose first PC had a GUI would still be doing it the wrong way.
Today's lesson is brought to you by the word "niggardly". Remember kids, don't attribute to racism what can be explained by Scandinavian language roots. -- Robert Royall
-
HTML :(( Please, who decided that tags like
didn't have to be closed. Now parsers have to waste their time checking for a closing tag. Also, how could people think that is ok? And what about? And what about JavaScript and the like? Why consider ' and " only within a script tag, and then allow <, but outside a script tag treat any instance of < as a tag opener? People's laziness in writing HTML slows down my computer by wasting processing. But seriously, why did people decide that HTMLers would be too stupid/lazy to close tags and layer them correctly?
jamie550 wrote:
But seriously, why did people decide that HTMLers would be too stupid/lazy to close tags and layer them correctly?
That was an excellent guess, as a matter of fact. People _are_ too lazy to close tags, a chance that some people realized that.
-
HTML :(( Please, who decided that tags like
didn't have to be closed. Now parsers have to waste their time checking for a closing tag. Also, how could people think that is ok? And what about? And what about JavaScript and the like? Why consider ' and " only within a script tag, and then allow <, but outside a script tag treat any instance of < as a tag opener? People's laziness in writing HTML slows down my computer by wasting processing. But seriously, why did people decide that HTMLers would be too stupid/lazy to close tags and layer them correctly?
who decided that tags like <br> didn't have to be closed Well, that's named HTML, and it have been around for many years. Way before XML was invented... Now parsers have to waste their time checking for a closing tag You just have to use an HTML parser, using the right DTD, indicating which tags must be closed and which might be left "open", and what is their scope (closed by another kind of tag), instead of an XML parser... Incorrect HTML: that's another story, that's why browsers are so tolerant (more or less: a browser might close a div by itself, another will take the div ends at the bottom of the document...). I don't understand the rant about JS... Anyway, should I have to parse HTML pages, I would use a good library like TagSoup to handle all these peculiarities.
Philippe Lhoste (Paris -- France)
Professional programmer and amateur artist
http://phi.lho.free.fr -
Yes, but closing tags in order and closing all tags is not complicated at all, and no technical skills are required to do so.