molly.com
Thursday 23 February 2006
How to Sniff Out a Rotten Standardista
JUST LIKE THE STINK OF A THREE DAY OLD FISH the arguments about standardistas preaching to the choir, being arrogant and generally being long past their due date persist.
In many cases, these arguments are useless and wrong. A good standardista works hard to educate as well as advocate. A fresh standardista understands that the world is filled with a wide range of people of different skill sets, talents and circumstances. A committed standardista understands the reasons the Web standards movement exists.
He or she knows the ideal: We must keep the visionary aspects of the Web intact via interoperability, platform and device independence, global access and accessibility to all. We must also know the history that brought us to the movement and the reasons and benefits as to why Web standards advocacy is critical to the solid growth of the World Wide Web.
But to be fair, there are some rotten standardistas in Web standards land. Fortunately, I don’t know too many of them despite my exposure and as some might point out, that I happen to be a big fish in the standards pond, but I do know they exist.
I’ve identified three primary types of rotten standardistas. Hopefully, this will begin to help us identify and clarify the type of standardista we want to avoid, as well as avoid being.
- The Bitch and Moan but Never Does. This rancid type is akin to those individuals who have the right to vote not voting and then bitching about a current, legitimately voted-in regime. Standardistas who never do can be found ranting about the evils of Microsoft, the fact that CSS can suck, and that XHTML is limited semantically. The rotten standardista leaves it at the rant, unlike the much more savory standardista who might actually share the same feelings. But the unstinky standardista articulates the same upsets to the world in ways that are helpful to others via education, through discussion rather than proselytization, and by means of bridge-building instead of bomb dropping. The smelly Bitch and Moan folk really aren’t forwarding the discussion and largely do not deserve your attention.
- I’m a Fucked Up Human in Need of a Tribe. Okay, so there are some good standardistas who probably fall into this category, myself included. But the fetid standardistas who float into this column are only calling themselves a standards advocate because for some strange reason, it’s perceived by some that being a standardista is cool! This category of nasty is often related to and has many of the habits of the Bitch and Moan type, but often is far more ignorant and couldn’t be bothered to learn enough to bitch in the first place. They also don’t deserve your attention.
- I’m Better than You Because my Site Validates. This breed of stink may be the worst of all. You can identify this type, apart from the particularly sulphur-like smell, because they are just plain mean and arrogant. The Better than You standardista finds it pleasurable to insult people who are struggling with the learning curve despite their willingness to learn; berate those who are misinformed by virtue of circumstance rather than chosen ignorance; and who poke fun at people who make decisions based on environmental issues rather than just following Web standards because they think standards are good. A great example of this would be someone who criticizes those hard working designers and developers who can’t achieve validation because of external circumstances such as CMSs and ad servers. You know the kind. Don’t avoid the I’m Better than You types, call them out because they’re doing a lot of harm.
The Web standards movement is necessary for the positive growth and long-term health of the Web. I only hope that if I ever start getting a bit smelly, someone will have the kindness of heart to take me aside and let me know I need to freshen up, or perhaps find another pond in which to swim.
Until that time, let’s help each other reduce the rank, manage the malodorous, and free the foul by supporting each other in positive, productive and inclusive ways as we wade through these murky, muddy days.
Filed under: professional, humor, policies, standards, blogging, web design and development, society
Posted by: Molly | 8:01 am |
February 23rd, 2006 at 8:20 am
Hear, hear!
I wholeheartedly agree and I have to say this post made me think, am I one of those, any of those?
I don’t think so but at least I am now aware. Thanks for another great read Molly!
February 23rd, 2006 at 8:23 am
And it does no good at all in helping others to learn/adopt the ‘right way’ to build a website.
February 23rd, 2006 at 8:32 am
Hi,
Truly enlightening, your post provides some points for self-analysis. Although a standards advocate, it shouldn’t become a display of fanaticism.
February 23rd, 2006 at 8:45 am
But I guess we are human beings after all and some times we lose our patience and hiss “idiot” at some designer who still doesn’t get it after you explained the same thing over and over again.
The truth is, of course, that you are a lousy teacher and that the subject of your impatience is not stupid or slow.
What does set my blood boiling though is that I often see young people at schools being taught the most horrible ways of coding; I mean, it is 2006 and especially teachers (the genuine, paid to do a teaching job) should stay on top of things: the web industry develops faster than you can think sometimes, but basic structures, issues in accesibility and cross browser issues stay the same.
Those kids have to unlearn before they can start working and that is a waste of time, money and talent.
February 23rd, 2006 at 9:07 am
having thought a bit about those 3 types, that you have described, i feel that:
* “the Bitch and Moan but Never Does” type - i have to confess, that i dislike a lot the people who are just talking, and not doing a thing to make the things better. Love it, change it or leave it - but do not cry that the things are bad, and that noone wants to change it.
* - the second one … hmmm … whos the tribe leader ? where do i join the cause ? where to sign ? =O)
* - to the third kind of the people, i use to say:
“hey, lets put our mobile phones on the table and see whos got a bigger one.” =O)
hahahaha
Everyone should try to be more tolerant.
(i have to do a lot of work in this direction =O) )
February 23rd, 2006 at 9:12 am
Martijn,
Excellent point!
I help a woman I work with when she has issues with her homework for an HTML class and I can’t believe the cruft they are passing out in the schools (at least in this case). But, if I complain more about it, I might just fall into the ‘bitch and moan’ category
February 23rd, 2006 at 9:15 am
I dunno about this tolerance thing… Molly, your post from 11/14 (which I wholeheartedly agreed with) didn’t seem all that tolerant.
Just playing devil’s advocate.
February 23rd, 2006 at 9:35 am
Ouch….
February 23rd, 2006 at 9:36 am
I think that number three is the reason I’m not more active in the online standards communities.
Let’s hear it for learning curves!
February 23rd, 2006 at 9:44 am
The third variation has actually been on my mind lately. I’m working on a big, big project for a big, big internet company in silicon valley. I actually grind my teeth in the car on the way home worrying about the flurry of complaints because a page won’t validate.
We’ve done everything we can, but when you’re pulling in content from other providers, you can’t control the junk.
AND… the new internet is full of user-generated content. Bring on the br tags.
Sigh…
I couldn’t care less about 1 and 2, I’m a scorpio and can out bitch and manipulate the best of them. But the number 3’s need to accept that we are not in a perfectly compliant world and we only do the best we can. And if they don’t stop, I’m going to tell my Mom!
February 23rd, 2006 at 9:44 am
People will always have differing opinions of what is right, and nowhere are these opinions more vocal than on the web in IT circles. It’s not surprising since, after all, our chosen medium promotes ‘write now, think later’ behaviour.
If you think the web standards arena has ‘rotten fish’ (a term I find particularly venemous) bitching, moaning and deriding, you should take a dip into the programming pond!
Working in both areas, I find the web standards crowd refreshing, dedicated and rational. Sure I’ve come across a few characters who seriously need to cool their egos, but they are few and far between. I just ignore them and move on because argument with them is generally futile.
Anyway, thanks for the reality check. Keep the faith.
February 23rd, 2006 at 10:11 am
Hey Molly,
I hope you didnt take my article as a criticism of either web standards or any particular individual. It was primarily driven (as I say in my post) from a realisation that I myself take the holier-than-thou attitude. I would agree that there are few web standards supporters who demonstrate these negative characteristics on a regular basis but I suspect if we are honest we all have a little bit of it in us sometimes. The post was born out of a fear that the community is in danger of becoming insure when there is still so much still to be done and so many people still to help and encourage to embrace standards.
Time seems to be the big barrier for most people rather than a lack of desire to learn. I go on to say in my next post (http://www.boagworld.com/archives/2006/02/investing_in_your_staff.html) that there is an education process that needs to happen with managers to convince them that their staff needs time to learn and embrace these advances.
Anyway, hopefully you didnt misunderstand my intent.
February 23rd, 2006 at 10:16 am
Preach it Molly!
February 23rd, 2006 at 10:36 am
I couldn’t understand whether you were upset with Paul’s entry, or happy that it was brought to our attention. Either way, point being that I think we all need to take a step back and review ourselves and see if we are potentially one of these people who aren’t pulling off one of these “Holier than thou” attitudes which can be damaging those who are seeking to learn standards for the first time.
Granted there are others who have that same attitude, but condone horrible practices, and make accessibly-disasterous websites, and still act like they are the Shizzo.
I guess maybe now is a good time for me to release that interview with Paul eh? He really is a wonderful guy with positive intentions.
February 23rd, 2006 at 10:39 am
Yep total agreement from me. Currently, I have two new juniors I am starting to teach web design to. As part of it comes of course web standards. I have been trying to not preach but to lead by example. I myself, only raised my head once I practiced what I preached - I firmly believe that if you can’t prove the pudding don’t attempt to bake it…. or something like that. Thing is these smelly preachers also lead to a lot of closed ear yeah yeah replies from people upon hearing web standards. When it comes down to it just do it and don’t lecture. Yes, teach and educate but by example not by bitching and having website validation peeing competitions.
February 23rd, 2006 at 11:57 am
Paul,
I thought Molly might have thought you arrogant from teh outset but I ended up thinking otherwise after I read your post.
February 23rd, 2006 at 12:05 pm
If I ask you when you would ever find it appropriate to use a definition list — which category would you place me in then?
February 23rd, 2006 at 12:36 pm
[…] Reading Molly’s comments on the matter of “Standardistas” [Warning: language] made me think about when I discovered the wuuunderful world of web standards. […]
February 23rd, 2006 at 3:57 pm
Molly, you have out done yourself. Great reflection on some of the Standarditas “over” zealous right to condemn others and yet not offering any assistance.
But frankly, after following some of the WCAG discussions, I’m left to believe there are more of these people than I would like in developing our web standards.
February 23rd, 2006 at 4:32 pm
Your post put me in a weird philosophical mood…
As with music, with every new thing I learn about webdesign I realise their’s ten more things I still need to learn, so who I am I to judge anybody else…
February 23rd, 2006 at 6:57 pm
Going out on a limb here. I have been thinking about a subtle distinction.
Some people can’t see that standards are just a means to an end. Take accessibility for example: the goal is to make the web accessible to all. WAI checkpoints, standards, etc are a formalization of that goal. A way of codifying it and managing it. I think that some forget that the standards themselves are not the goal.
I work for government, I see this often: “You must adhere to the regulations as set forth on form 27B/6″ (or such) rather than: “we should make the website accessible for our visitors”.
The world becomes very black and white: you meet the requirement or fail. I have found some people like this to be extremely abrupt and not fond of discussion.
Add a few personality problems and voila! You have the derisive, snarky, nasty, standardista.
It is good to get back to basics and really think why you are fighting for standards.
Remember what we are about! As Molly said:
It is not about enforcing standards: it is about reinforcing the vision with the help of standards.
February 23rd, 2006 at 7:14 pm
it was really nice reading your post. i’ve just become vp of a web design firm, and in my research to make this company reach unimagineable levels of awesome, i’ve studied a LOT about css and web standards. there’s so much i don’t know, but i’m trying to do the right thing, and i’m trying to take this company to the next level. so it’s just comforting to know there are people like you who are here to be helpful and give CONSTRUCTIVE criticisms. there are several blogs i intend to check every single day, just to make sure i don’t miss out on something important, and to make sure i stay on the right track. thanks.
February 23rd, 2006 at 9:00 pm
[…] Molly’s post on stank standardistas cinched it for me. Yeah, I can bitch and moan about people misunderstanding a wide variety of things (e.g., Ruby, Rails, web standards, nonviolence, consensus, Thomas Dolby), but it doesn’t really produce anything. From here on out, every time I read about someone complaining about this, that, or the other, I’m going to take that irritation I feel and convert it into energy for one of my projects. […]
February 23rd, 2006 at 9:03 pm
I’ve only recently seen the light about web standards - and although I’m now totally up on XHTML, CSS and semantic design I was still doing OSVD work as recently as 8 months ago … and I’m sure many people who started learning web design back in the early-mid 90’s weren’t doing semantic design back then. And even if you have never done non-standards compliant design, there’s nothing constructive about bagging people out who perhaps haven’t made a complete transition to web standards compliance.
Standards are good, but just because you may not be following standards doesn’t mean you can’t design. I know heaps of OSVD designers who do amazing work - and I endevour to show them the alternative way of web standards, but at the end of the day who can say which way is better? OSVD designed sites may not be accessible, but they draw clients and make sales. They still work. They generate revenue. No one of us is bigger than all of us to be able to say what is right and what is wrong, and to judge anyone. The only thing that can truely discern objectively what is right and wrong is current legislation on accessibility.
I’ll just go on and continue to try and do my bit for the community; continue to learn and grow, continue to share my knowledge with others, and learn from what others have to show me regardless of what side of whatever fence they’re on.
Yes, Molly, you can on occasion come across as a bit more-holier-than-thou … but it’s an incidental thing. It is not your entire stance on these issues, and is therefore entirely excusable … we’re only human, and if you’re passionate about these things then it’s only to be expected that on occasion you will allow your feelings to influence your professionalism in some small degree.
Keep up the good work
February 23rd, 2006 at 11:01 pm
Mmm now I’m not sure if I’m stinky or not but I am what I am I guess. I never made sites any other way and don’t know how, I made a table based layout once at school and it was dodgey.
While I hope I don’t fall into any of these categories I may of course be one of the blogs you came across doing one of these things. Perhaps. Well I don’t know.
I’ve generally found, Molly, that the best way to cause discomfort in any group is to talk about “those people” without naming names… (ie someone’s been talking to the law and we know who it is but aren’t saying). So naturally I wonder if I am such a standardista. Maybe I’m not even a standardista because I just do what I do because its how I solve problems to make money. I’m not sure I’m evangelical either but I do call out the occasional company which sells crap product.
That being said my client just went live with a site that doesn’t validate and its not in my sphere of ability to log in to take out the font tag went in when he spell checked in Outlook.
So if I am such a standardista who has offended you Molly then I apologise whole heartedly and you only need send me a short email to point out my flaws. I’m not an unreasonable man. I need to eat less, exercise (any of that), and not drink beer. Sorry if this is a long reply but as I said broad no-names articles generally bring out an insecurity in people.
February 23rd, 2006 at 11:04 pm
I must add that I often find myself spending an hour or two helping someone who asks me how to solve issues and who I have never heard from before or again. Even having to make time to achieve their progress. So I don’t think I’m all that bad. Not that you mean me of course but ….
February 23rd, 2006 at 11:10 pm
[…] Sniffing Out Stinky Standardistas - a conversation not naming names because they know who they are… apparently. […]
February 24th, 2006 at 3:10 am
I consider the people that advocate with a fury that XHTML may only be used with the right MIME-type, “otherwise you have to use HTML,” to firmly fit in the third group.
MIME-type issues be damned. Bigger picture, people, bigger picture. Good for you that your site validates, or that you downgraded back to HTML — now let’s focus on things that are important again.
February 24th, 2006 at 3:59 am
I’m glad you’ve laid out some boundaries, Molly. The problem with any advocation is probably the tendancy for a kind of backlash, when people rebel against the message because the messengers are all elitest assholes.
I’ve been trying to focus on the tangible, practicle benefits to using standards and other best practices. It’s a lot easier to say “do this because its better/cool/sexy/etc.” but it won’t convince anyone to start taking action, it’ll only give a warm feeling to those already doing so.
February 24th, 2006 at 4:12 am
I’d be interested to see your thoughts on the other side of the fence, and categorise those who are aiming for good.
For instance, I’m a one-man-show (designer/developer), living in a town where I don’t know anyone else who’s even mildly interested in developing with standards. If it weren’t for blogs like yours, I’d feel pretty isolated. I aim for web standards, ’cause I figure if I’m going to do something I should try and do it properly. Plus, I’m tired of fragmented support in browsers, and I care about accessibility. The only problem is, I’m still learning, and even when I get a site to validate XHTML, CSS, WAI, and 508 (rarely), I’m still not entirely sure if that means I have done my job properly. I’d be reticent to announce: “I’ve made it!”. I say this, because I understand there is usually a component of these validations that can only be carried out by a human eye, and I’m not convinced I have that eye just yet. I also understand there is usually a better way of achieving something while still maintaining validation. Actually, I doubt I’ll ever announce: “I’ve made it!”, after all, this art (and science) of developing for the web seems to zag every other day, keeping us on our toes… I think we have to keep a collective open mind. I also try not to let my trail of less than savoury implementations get me down. It’d be a shame if someone decided it was necessary to flame me for them. I’ve seen this happen to others on message-boards, people who have recently joined the ‘good fight’, but need direction.
I’m often hesitant to reveal that I’ve “given it a go” - but still don’t entirely understanding what it is that I’ve done (I mean, I usually have a fair idea, but I’m a ways off of Zen enlightenment - excuse the pun).
So, for these reasons alone, I hold my tongue most of the time and try my best to figure out who really knows what they’re talking about, and who doesn’t, and listen to the most informed voices as part of my ongoing education. Its trial and error, and sometimes I’m left shaking my head, and telling myself “I’ll have to revisit such-and-such when I have another piece of the puzzle”. It can be confusing - to say the least.
What would this make me? A Padawan on the path of the Jedi?
Or, just a confused Star Wars geek dabbling on the web?
February 24th, 2006 at 7:21 am
Hey everyone,
Thanks for the great comments
A few additional thoughts.
Remember to look at the category/tags on blog posts. This can help avoid confusion. If you see the tag “humor” somewhere in the string, it means my tongue is in my cheek rather than me just being on a rant. So while I believe the underlying issues here, I am in fact having some fun.
@Martijn: You raise a very important concern regarding education. Educators bear a serious responsibility in keeping up with what they’re teaching. Unfortunately, many get their information through publishing channels - the books and software they buy drives curriculum. The WaSP eduTF (Education Task Force) has been quietly but steadily making inroads into this issue, but it needs to be written and discussed more, I believe.
@Baxter: Yep, the New Professionalism post is a strong bit, but of course in that case I am doing a bit of preaching to the choir. Does it make me a stinky standardista? I think not, because at least according to my own criteria (how convenient
) I do not berate individuals who are genuinely making an attempt to learn. I am fundamentally an educator, my writing, speaking and training are all focused on helping people as they make their way. So I have a very real front-line experience of people’s struggles and triumphs in this regard. Now, if I were merely spouting opinions without actions behind them, then I’d be stinky!
@Paul: It was your post that got me thinking, but I wasn’t mad at you at all! In fact, you inspired this bit, which really was fun to write. So no worries, but I appreciate your consideration that you might have upset me. And that goes for you as well, Dustin. Isn’t the point of writing on blogs to extend the conversation and have some fun, too?
@Allen: That’s a question that would turn into a discussion, which would be educational for all. So I wouldn’t categorize you based on just that criteria.
@Norty: Again, this is all food for thought. I didn’t name names because that’s not what’s important, really. As people have pointed out, even I come across a bit smelly sometimes, and I do question my own approaches. But again, I feel justified because I put so much passion into this particular subject, and work very directly to not be a holier than thou type.
I think a lot just comes down to knowing we’re all in this together, and that we all have limitations. I know a lot about XHTML and CSS these days, but I don’t necessarily know about lots of other subjects, and I don’t always put my knowledge into best practice (my own site is a mess right now, for example).
@Adam: I’d say a Padawan on the path.
Fun stuff, everyone!
February 24th, 2006 at 7:27 am
Don’t forget HOWTO Spot a Wannabe Web Standards Advocate. I’m sure I’ve been guilty of at least 50% of those…
February 24th, 2006 at 10:37 am
Lovely ! And very well said. Reminds me that standards, like most rules, “are meant for the guidance of the wise, not blind obedience by fools.”
February 24th, 2006 at 10:57 am
Whew! Thank goodness for that. I seem to be having a run of upsetting people online so I am glad you weren’t another one. Perhaps that is part of the problem here. So much of this debate about standards happens online and the web is notorious for making communicate a challenge. Perhaps we actually all agree and this whole web standards debate is a massive misunderstanding
February 24th, 2006 at 11:34 am
Great post, Molly - particularly concerning the “I’m better than you” brigade. I’m just coming to the end of a 9 month project building XSLT/CSS/HTML for a content management system which drives around forty sites owned by the client, each of which is updated daily by its own content manager(s), and all bearing advertisements.
Although I know my code is rock solid when it leaves my hands, I also know that it could, with some justification, be accused of divitis and/or classitis. However this is an unavoidable consequence of anticipating the weird combinations of page components that somebody will one day come up with. I also know that the live sites won’t validate because of the truly, madly, deeply horrible things coming from the ad servers.
It’s been a source of dismay for me to think that these real-world constraints will undoubtedly lead some posturing know-it-all to sneer at the results of my hard work, but in future I’ll remember this post and let it “run like duck’s water off me back”, as Roger McGough has it.
February 24th, 2006 at 3:15 pm
I don’t mean to nitpick(okay, maybe), but how do you reconcile this:
“I didn’t name names because that’s not what’s important, really.”
with:
“Don’t avoid the I’m Better than You types, call them out because they’re doing a lot of harm.”
…which, I think, is what Nortypig might have been referencing. Given that you’re essentially laying out a set of definitions, examples are in order. You can’t actually say you didn’t have people in mind when making this list.
February 24th, 2006 at 4:27 pm
Ha ha. Maybe I feel a bit insecure about some of the things I do on a personal level is all. I do have a tendency occasionally to point at some big fish in my little pond here and question how something can be “award winning” or “the best site 2005″. But i did read the humour tag I confess…
Of course I am quite aware of keeping an eye on whether someone is trying. I have targeted one CMS maker in the past which makes, as far as they go, a pretty good one. Better than Mambo for sure. But they have a certain portfolio page where they claim all of the sites are “W3C compliant” when a simple validator run through them shows up to 300 errors and not just for non breaking spaces. That page IMHO is an advertisement sucking punters in to believe that just because in a pristine environment the CMS can produce valid code - at an interveiw once they spieled to me AAA rating but that is highly questionable - should infer these sites are therefore valid is rubbish.
(As I’m working currently in a lowly support position on a short term contract - public sector - I can’t particularly point the finger at them today but a short search of my archives or a google might pull up the articles in question)
So in short I kind of do see I could be dropped into some of these piles depending on the person classifying me…
I think I have slowly lost the shine of zealot from my armour though and as time has gone on I’ve incorporated a larger view than the rigid hard line black and right. The fact is developers are operating in organisational structures and cultures where they may be a small part of a department among many - these things have to be punted to the managers who don’t know the web. I’m also suffering at the moment where I don’t have the control over the client’s content after hand-over so I see a font tag and a closing strong simply because they cut and pasted into Outlook for spell checking.
Yes I think I see where you’re coming from Molly. Its like being in a room when someone smells and I sniff my armpits to see if its me. Sometimes its hard to tell
Its a healthy interesting conversation though so you’ve got me in ….
February 24th, 2006 at 8:51 pm
[…] OK tired subject but I thought a bit after reading Molly E. Holzschlag’s How To Sniff Out a Rotten Standardista and reread an old article [a very interesting article] from Mike Davidson called March To Your Own Standard and mixed all of that in with a torrent of posts over the last six months that go on about validation and standardistas and probably anything else my head can gel with at 3am. […]
February 25th, 2006 at 2:14 am
I believe most people are forgetting that we, the general internet-public, put Molly and the Web Standards Team on that “more-holy-than-I pedestal”.
Well, I have.
Food for Thought: If every web page on the world wide web validated, Molly and crew would be out of a job. Keep up the good work Molly!
For all the murk and mud, I prefer swimming in the clear end of the pond, where the code is clean. Mostly…
February 25th, 2006 at 3:44 pm
In the end I think the best thing is to be true to ourselves and make pages the best way we know how. Advocate and teach without preaching if possible but sometimes I honestly think things do need to be pointed out as wrong… like the Disney UK site going backwards. Or accessibility awards given to inaccessible sites.
On the bright side… there’s nothing as sweet as creating something the right way and understanding its strengths and weaknesses for what it really is. We all take pride in our work and even in organisations where we aren’t empowered to fix all the issues or the technologies used prevent us for attaining perfection its our input which pushes the product to be the best it can be under the conditions we’re given. These ideals are what unite us - all varying flavours of us - into a movement. People like Molly are catalysts for action and thought and are essential to bringing conversations like this together. Thanks Molly. Just keep up how you’re going
February 25th, 2006 at 4:26 pm
[…] molly.com » How to Sniff Out a Rotten Standardista sadly I’ve been there (tags: webdevelopment funny css design) […]
February 26th, 2006 at 8:17 pm
Hmm good point Stephen, but I do think there’s more to standards than validating against a W3C schema … but I get what you mean
February 27th, 2006 at 3:14 pm
[…] [ Socially Offline ] [#] Another successful and great Geekdinner, this time with Paul Boag from the Boagworld design podcast. This time around I decided to try a local designer doing good stuff for the community. PaulBoag fitted the bill perfectly since I’ve been listening to his podcast for a while now. Around 30 people showed up and enjoyed the evening with Paul. Now this may seem small compared to the 70 of Dave Shea but its not far off Tim O’Reilly and Molly type attendance. What I found interesting is the percentage of new faces and regulars. It always seems to stay around the same percentage no matter what guest. I’ve not worked out if this is good or bad yet but we’ll see at the next one I guess. Something else which did change this time was the percentage of women. It went down this time which is a shame but I know quite a few women who simply couldn’t make it this time.So as usual people turned up before even I got there which is always a suprise. Paul and Marcus turned up just after myself which was about 18:30 ish. Between 19:20 and 19:45 the bulk of the people came which is usual. And before you knew it the food was being handed out. This was great because usually people ask me when the foods coming and I usually have to say soon, honestly soon. But this time it was so early that it even took me by suprise. I had not even collected the money and given out sticky name tags yet. So I’m glad to say that the Polar Bear will be come the home of Geekdinner unless they have it booked for other events (they have June booked out for the World Cup or something). Its big enough for 100 people and we have complete control over music, noise and the lighting. There’s a complete DJ and Mic setup so its possible to record talks and even finally broadcast the speakers talking to the whole room without the speaker shouting out loud and loosing there voice.But back to the night, by the time everyone had a chance to get there food and digested I had introduced Paul and we were away. Paul’s talk was mainly a public reply to Molly’s post How to sniff out a Rotten Standardista. I won’t recite much of what Paul said but it was pretty funny in parts and it was recorded by Marcus and another person (can’t remember your name sorry). I know the Boagworld is planning a special podcast with the recordings they made, so I’m hoping to be linking to the podcast soon enoughPodcast. But after talking about Molly’s post and the fact that we look inside of the design community too much, Paul started on Web 2.0. He was convinced its all smells too much like a bubble. Before long Paul was being beaten to death with questions and comments. In the end, Paul had to give in and make it clear that something like Digg.com smells like a Bubble type site while Flickr before it was bought was not because they at least had a business plan. Honestly Paul was great, he really took it all on the chin and was glad to admit he might have changed his mind a little. Paul also gave a nice talk about how we and the pros are actually making it up as they go along. If we were more honest about this things might actually be better overall. So without spilling any more tasty beans, I got to say Paul was fantastic and Marcus was great too (i can’t believe his arm never fell asleep. holding the mic for almost a hour I believe?) I actually closed my eyes at one point and seriously it sounded like the batter of a usual Boagworld podcast. Great stuff and thanks again to Paul and Marcus for making the trip up to London and taking part in a great Geekdinner.For those who don’t know there was a special competition which included a trip to Austin Texas to the South by South East interactive conference (SXSW). Not only did the jammy winner get tickets to the conference but he also got his hotel paid for and flights paid for by the little bit of sponsership which sits on Geekdinner.co.uk now. The names were pulled out of my grey hat by Paul Boag and Simon won, much to the disappointment of everyone else who entered. Kinda of wish I could have entered myself really too. Simon’s already offered to fly the London Geekdinner flag for us and plans to meetup with a couple of people who have already booked there tickets to go. Good luck Simon, have a great time!I spoke to so many people during the rest of the evening but I would like to say thanks to everyone for coming and making it a great geekdinner. It was less people but it was nice and friendly and there was plenty of food to go around for all. Oh by the way Jen and other vegatarians, the polar bear serves food on single plates so the meat is easily avoidable. Tom asked me if it was ok for a Vegan and I couldn’t honestly say yes, but I believe even he was able to find something good and safe to eat. Another reason to stay at the polar bear I guess? Whatever it is, there is a flickr group I set up here and my own photos tagged geekdinnerwithboag here. Can’t wait to arrange the next one now.Oh by the way Simon that lucky guy and Rachel have a good review of the evening too. […]
February 28th, 2006 at 1:41 am
Online Magazine Technology Review in neuem Gewand
In diese Meldung hatte ich als Leser des Online-Magazines die Hoffnung gesteckt, dass es sich von seinem alten wenig standardkonformen Auftritt getrennt hat und neue Mastbe setzen wrde. Leider belehrte mich die Umsetzung der deutsche Ausgabe von
February 28th, 2006 at 3:33 am
Mmhh…I think I am all three…In mind that is ! In actual life I would never show this of course…:worried: But for a few months now I am having my doubts on the whole validating thing. Are we all not just obeying the likes of Google, that would like it if all pages were validated ?
I have never heard a ‘real’ person ask me ‘Will it validate ?’…Should Google not just obey the mainstream of webdesigners and the way they think it all would be best ?
Is validating Google ? And isn’t this just a way to keep us busy over nothing so Google and the likes stay in charge ? I am really wondering…
Isn’t Flash the future anyway ?!
I’m a nagger in doubt !
February 28th, 2006 at 11:24 am
[…] Molly points out that some types of standard proponents stand in the way of standardization. She singles out three types of ‘Standardista’s’ that are going about standardization the wrong way: “The Bitch and Moan but Never Does,” the “I’m a F***** Up Human in Need of a Tribe,” and “I’m Better than You Because my Site Validates.” […]
February 28th, 2006 at 3:30 pm
[quote}I’m a Fucked Up Human in Need of a Tribe[/quote]
Molly, I just have to say, you are just AWESOME!
It is refreshing to read what someone “REALLY” thinks and is not afraid to say it!
So thank you and someday, I hope to thank you in person!..
March 1st, 2006 at 5:20 pm
Quick links
Quick links: Stuff found while seeking something else… exercise grows neurons… hidden passages in your house… more, in the extended entry….
March 7th, 2006 at 10:57 pm
[…] In this episode Dustin is accompanied by JavaScript extraordinare Jonathan Snook where they take a look at the current state of JavaScript in these confusing times. Albeit the terrible lag between the two conversing you’ll hear an interesting discussion involving rotten standardistas and renaissance men, all of which can revolve around a good ‘ol game of bowling. […]
March 11th, 2006 at 2:30 am
“I’m Better than You Because my Site Validates.”
Mmm, does this mean I can actually ask you questions that have been plauging me ever since I started doing CSS and you’ll (gasp) *actually* answer them, rather than leaving it to me to figure it out for myself?
Oh, okay - here are the major questions been bugging me ever since I started CSS
____
1) How many CSS hacks are we meant to be using from the get-go?
a) Just the high-pass filter, and filter out NN4 and anything under IE6?
b) Just the * hack, box hack and that’ll do?
c) Every last one of them?
d) None of them, if your browser doesn’t understand CSS then its your fault?
2) Why is it necessary to use CSS hacks at all? Isn’t CSS meant to be media-specific and not browser-specific?
3) Mime-type. I’ve heard a lot about this, but can someone answer how to solve this problem once and for all? Do I have to use PHP/programming language/apache to sort it out? Or is it all worrying over nothing?
4) If a page validates as XHTML+CSS+WAI Priority 2/3; is that enough?
5) I’ve heard that you’re not meant to use structural markup to clear floats, and I’ve seen some examples but I’ve also been told that it doesn’t always work and its best to stick with structural markup to clear floats; what is the right answer?
Many thanks.
March 11th, 2006 at 8:09 am
[…] After reading through the comments on my levels of CSS article I find that I few people seem to think that the article is a way to ridicule beginners. It’s not. It’s a way to document the steps that I think I have climbed. Some people also thought that this set of levels is a good indicator of how good sites you will make. That’s also false. Being Level 5 or 6 in the list means that you are a good coder, nothing else. It does not mean that a site you make is any good, I’ve seen many sites that have great code but that still makes me want to kill someone. Don’t confuse good web developers with good coders. “Don’t be a rotten standardista” as Molly Holzschlag would put it. […]
March 23rd, 2006 at 11:12 pm
there is a fine line between sloppyandgoodatmakingexcuses and genuinereasonsivehackedthebejeesusouttathissite i dont mind the second- validation isnt the be - all and end - all- but why should some do research and testing while others just slap together any crappy old code and yet both get to call themselves web developers?
google is just a few keys away…
I may be the third sometimes but not exactly- my belief is that you may not be better because your site validates - but you ARE better because you take pride in your work - nothing to be ashamed of in that.
Someone mentioned the education and how students are being taught incorrect practice- i agree and thats where my biggest gripe lies!
March 25th, 2006 at 11:01 am
[…] Gefunden auf molly.com ist “How to Sniff Out a Rotten Standardista” ein sehr gelungener Nachschlag zum Thema Erbsenzählerei 2.0: […]
June 3rd, 2006 at 11:04 am
[…] molly.com How to Sniff Out a Rotten StandardistaShe singles out three types of Standardista s that are going about standardization the wrong way: The Bitch and Moan but Never Does, the I m a F***** Up Human in Need of a Tribe […]
September 26th, 2006 at 10:26 am
fuck u
September 26th, 2006 at 10:27 am
BITCH
September 26th, 2006 at 10:29 am
I WANTED TO FIND OUT HOW CAN I GET PUSSY IF I AM UGLY
September 26th, 2006 at 10:36 am
molly i want to make love to u
September 26th, 2006 at 10:37 am
molly.com
Q: What’s this web site?
A: I’m Molly E. Holzschlag, and this web site shares my web development work and personal thoughts. Think of it as a personality site. Given that, one hopes I have an interesting enough personality to keep you entertained for at least a little while.
October 3rd, 2006 at 3:51 am
aykjljn
cpdyvnpe zknnbtaaeu kvbrlcptfs tpdpfwqig
October 23rd, 2006 at 2:01 pm
[…] The morning started with a breakfast with none-other than Ms Molly Holzschlag which was an open discussion about the new professionalism that we as web developers strive for in an ever-changing environment. It was mainly about bridging that knowledge gap, not only between clients and developers (where clients don’t fully require what’s involved with the construction of their websites), but also between savvy standardistas and your el cheapo, template-fodder hacks. It was a great discussion, however, as per the norm with this kind of forum, nothing was resolved. Following breakfast, the conference resumed with prize give-aways, of which I won nothing. If I’d realised that prizes would be given to the most creative flickr/blog posters, I would have probably tried a bit harder. (Maybe I’ll give this live-blogging thang a go next time.) Oh well, too bad, so sad. On with the recap: […]
April 14th, 2007 at 10:58 pm
Interesting comments..
May 24th, 2007 at 9:56 am
dzanqz
July 2nd, 2007 at 9:32 am
This is exactly what I expected to find out after reading the title How to Sniff Out a Rotten Standardista. Thanks for informative article
July 3rd, 2007 at 9:16 pm
thanks for sharing.
August 27th, 2007 at 7:37 pm
sex
August 27th, 2007 at 7:37 pm
porn
August 27th, 2007 at 7:38 pm
sexy
August 27th, 2007 at 7:39 pm
……..
August 27th, 2007 at 7:39 pm
….
September 10th, 2007 at 1:31 pm
……………………………….
September 10th, 2007 at 1:38 pm
………………………….
September 10th, 2007 at 1:40 pm
ekle site ekle hemen ekle
September 10th, 2007 at 1:43 pm
tamam anladık
September 10th, 2007 at 1:43 pm
mobilyatr.com tenks
September 10th, 2007 at 1:45 pm
sohbete.net usta
October 17th, 2007 at 2:55 pm
sohbetiniz.net
December 12th, 2007 at 11:02 pm
[…] Now this page clearly fails to comply with the UK Government proposed requirements. And what will happen if these proposals are accepted and the Queen’s fails to correct the errors by next year’s deadline? Will the Government attempt to shut down Her Majesty’s Web site? Will the Government take the Queen to court? But won’t “Regina vs Regina ” lead to a constitutional crisis? Will this lead to the demise of the monarchy and the establishment of a republic? Or will such a vindictive move by pedantic civil servants lead to a backlash, with the possibility of the Tower for the more extreme of the ‘accessibility standardistas‘? […]
January 24th, 2008 at 11:09 am
What is a standardista? I have lived for over 50 years in an english speaking country and have never heard that word until now. If you are going to use obscure language… DEFINE YOUR TERMS!… so that we the reader know waht you are talking about.
January 24th, 2008 at 11:59 am
BTW: who gives a rats ass about web development except for computer nerds. The human race is better off with out the web and computres in general. Such trivial preoccupations exist to feed technocracies (companies who benefit from computer usage). They do not benefit human kind in general. They become obsessions with some and preoccupations in general. And they distract us from things that are much more important to our welfare. My answer to condescending, patronizing, arrogant computer nerd is to punch them in the face. They are upset by the punch but at least they drop their arrogance. And believe me most computer geeks, pussy boy software programmers and others who think the WWW is the “be all, end all” for human existance are usually flacid physical weeklings… “ONE PUNCH and their out” types. That someone so physically vulnerable would dare to condescend on others who don’t share their interests and aptitudes is audacious beyond belief! How do I know? I was victmized for over a week by some suck hole who was hired to assist me with computer skills. This was a “teacher” of some Oracle/Novell networking technology, claimed to have all kinds of degrees and constantly berated and insulted others who “won’t keep up” or “wasted his time”. He was a computer bully. He was so arrogant that he refused to call them computers. He kept calling them “work stations” I told him that the work station was the who desk area. He then embarassed me in front of my peers and among other things told me I was a “train wreck” because I couldn’t keep up and “why do I bother?” and that I was wasting his and everyones time. Well, I clocked him right in the bazoo. Remember that this kind of talk had been going on for some days. have you ver been pestered by a relentless mosquito until you are ready to go mad? This ass clown coward fell down and was stunned then proceeded to wimper and finally run. But it was so good to see such an instant attitude adjustment. He later threatened to sue until I told him that I’d report his way of speaking to the course officials and he might lose his job. Coward.
January 31st, 2008 at 10:00 pm
Those who choose to take the “slights and disappointments” path, meanwhile, are very generously compensated for their trouble
February 6th, 2008 at 4:53 am
Oh my, i appreciate this is an old article but i cannot stand accessibility gurus! what a waste of time and resources.
March 5th, 2008 at 3:48 pm
my mind mixed
April 7th, 2008 at 3:18 am
it is easy to find it, i think u just search on google or yahoo
April 8th, 2008 at 7:24 am
but, i think it is another thing which you have
April 8th, 2008 at 5:06 pm
i like it
April 8th, 2008 at 10:30 pm
interesting, thanks
April 9th, 2008 at 7:35 am
do you know everything about css?
April 9th, 2008 at 4:12 pm
how can i find everything about css?
April 10th, 2008 at 6:21 am
what do you want to learn about css? we can help easily
April 11th, 2008 at 9:41 am
i want learn too, i want start at the beginning of css
April 21st, 2008 at 3:26 pm
it is good t see u
April 21st, 2008 at 7:33 pm
thats the matter i want to learn
April 21st, 2008 at 11:42 pm
ok,thanks
April 24th, 2008 at 7:11 am
hi, umit. how is going on
April 26th, 2008 at 10:02 pm
I’m grateful for all the standardists, even the crappy ones. Perhaps Ted’s threat to tell his mom brings into focus another sub-category…
In any case, I wish him success in quitting the habit of grinding his teeth in the car