|
|
Posted by aioe-user on 04/16/07 05:55
krzywon wrote:
>> «html»«body»X«/body»«/html»
>>
>> Total size 28 bytes
>
> This is not a complete HTML document. Read the MODERN standards.
>
>> 1/3 the US is STILL on 56k, and probably 80% of the
>> world 'net' population will stay on 56k it for decades more.
>
> You should only be worried about single bytes if you're still using a
> 2400 baud modem. For a 56k you get trouble downloading when you have
> 100s of kB and MB.
I worry about single bytes that all add up and I have a high
speed broadband connection. The reason I do have it now is
that my 56k line had become virtually UNUSABLE because of all
the bloating that's being done (albeit mostly but not entirely
by content).
>> Then it got much worse. Another page flunked because it
>> was missing 'empties' like alt="" (up another 600 bytes
>> for a page with 100 of them). This kind of insanity is
>> like having to paint "not painted" on a car that is not
>> painted. Sheeee!
>
> You're asking people to write thin HTML to save on download time, but
> you have a single page with 100 pictures? A little contradictory, me
> thinks! Also, the alt tag is not an 'empty' as you say. Many people
> with impaired vision surf the internet every day! How do you think
> they find out what pictures are on your site? Their screen reader
> reads the alt tag.
No. Let people write complex pages and/or style sheets when they
feel they should. My point was that I saw no reason to junk the
basic and simple standard that started it all. I prefer to do
thin (your word) html.
>> ...
>> Valid HTML 4.01 Transitional To show your readers that you have taken
>> the care to create an interoperable Web page, you may display this
>> icon on any page that validates. Here is the HTML you could use to add
>> this icon to your Web page:
>
> This isn't required. Anyone can check the validity of your HTML and
> CSS simply by going to the W3C.
You're commenting on w3c output; I think their idea was precicely
to help people find out where they might validate a page. Thanks
for the comment all the same.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|