Idiots Disguised as Computer People

I've seen a bunch of silly stuff recently on the Web, but this guy passed the silly mark and went to the "so silly I have to write about it" mark. Apparently, this is from the creator/owner of StatCounter.

Why xhtml valid code is not validating as w3c valid code - why?

It can't! If you want w3c valid code then tick the w3c valid code box in the code generation page. If you want xhtml valid code then tick the valid xhtml valid code.

You can't have w3c valid and xhtml valid. Personally I don't see the need for xhtml valid code on a website so I'd recommend to go with w3c.

First off, the W3C is the standards body that came up with the XHTML standard. Lots of different types of code can be W3C valid, including HTML, XHTML, CSS, SOAP, JavaScript, etc. Saying that you can't have code that is W3C valid and XHTML valid at the same time is like saying you can't have a car and a Ford Mustang at the same time: the second item is a subset of the first! I think he may have meant "HTML 4.0" instead of W3C, but even then, XHTML is valid HTML 4.0.

Next, it really bugs me when someone puts a lot of effort into making their Web site and product look very professional, but they don't put any time into fixing their grammar, punctuation, and capitalization. I don't have time to list all of the errors in the quoted text above, but you should be able to find at least ten.

This example just helps to strengthen a point I've made for years now: just because someone says they're a computer person doesn't mean they are any smarter or more techno-saavy than the average person. Don't just believe everything someone says because every other word they use is an acronym (that should be capitalized when written) or because they work in the IT department. Question everything, use your favorite search engine (Google) to find multiple sources, and learn something new for yourself.

Speaking if IT departments, remind me to share my feelings on H1-Bs and why the IT outsourcing craze of the early 21st century is a good thing.

Flickr or Fade?

The coming of a new year and a new month for Flickr "pros" to upload their next two gigabytes of photos seems to be overwhelming the popular photo-sharing site. Just like many of the other new paid subscribers to the site, I have been frantically uploading, "tagging", and organizing my 3000+ photos. This tidal wave of new photos seems to be causing some problems on the Flickr servers, though, with frequent warnings of the site running "HOT". I'm sure the problems will be corrected soon, though. Everything else about the way Flickr works has been very impressive.

Well, I do have one other concern with Flickr: the way it handles security for private photos. Currently, Flickr allows you to mark a photo as private, but you can then make private photos available to family and friends. Unfortunately, for people to be considered either family or friends, they must sign up for a Flickr account of their own. I have a lot of photos marked as viewable by only friends or family, but I don't really want to force all my friends and family members to sign up for Flickr accounts just to see my photos! So I'm hoping that Flickr will add a new feature soon to allow us to password protect photo sets or to allow people to be recognized as family or friends without having to sign up for an account.

I have a lot of work to do on my photo sets on Flickr before I really want to announce them to everyone, though, so I'm not in a huge rush for the new security features. For now, even with servers running at a slow pace and un-friendly friends and family options, I'm still a happy Flickr pro. :-)

Happy Bunny

Who's Your Happy Bunny?
brought to you by Quizilla