Archive for the 'html' Category


Saturday, February 2nd, 2008

….validatin’ ur HTMLz

I’ve been working on a side project for awhile, called The basic idea is that you signup, give it a few URLs you care about and it’ll check them about every 24 hours to see if the HTML is valid. You can then get a feed of the results. A simple idea, so simple I’m surprised no one’s done it before.

For now, the site is somewhat limited: you can only have 5 URLs to be checked, and it will only check them on schedule (you can’t force it to update), but I plan on lifting some of these restrictions and adding new types of checks in the future, and there’ll probably be a subscription premium version, too. I releasing this now because I want to get more feedback on the ideas and design.

So, go check it out, then tell me what you think.

New HTML Working Group

Friday, October 27th, 2006

Tim Berners Lee, the Director of the W3C, has just announced (on his blog, no less) that the W3C will be starting a new Working Group to work on HTML (in parallel to the existing WG, which will concentrate on xHTML).

A few comments about the announcement:

  • It doesn’t seem clear how the new and old HTML Working Group’s will interact. I wonder if the old one is being kept around as a compromise for those who still prefer that HTML be a strict XML dialect?
  • TimBL mentions the WHATWG, an independent, less formal group with has been working on an alternative future for HTML. According to Hixie (the leader of WHATWG), TimBL is wrong to say that WHATWG has no process. They have a process, which is, as Hixie puts it: i listen to people, i make a decision, i publish, rinse, repeat.
  • I wonder if WHATWG and Hixie in particular have been contacted and/or recruited to join this new WG? I doubt how successful the new HTML WG can be without the support of the the individuals involved in WHATWG.
  • TimBL says As always, we will be insisting on working implementations and test suites.. I find this somewhat disingenuous, was many existing W3C RECs (recommendations) don’t have test suites and where formalized without having interoperable implementations.

The Dark Ages of the Web

Wednesday, October 5th, 2005

The meme-whore in me has wanted to dive into the “What is Web 2.0 meme” for awhile, but I haven’t been able to crystalize my thoughts until now….

Now, I think Web 2.0 makes sense as a renaissance.

Of course, renaissance means simply “rebirth,” and therefore gives the implication that something which was once alive has died, but now came back to life. And in my limited understanding of history, I think of the European Renaissance as a time period where learning which was once well known in Europe (among the Greeks and Romans) was rediscovered and reintroduced into the intellectual dialogue.

Interestingly, though, much of that knowledge had been preserved in other realms, esp. in the Middle East among Arabic scholars. The knowledge was also largely available in texts all over Europe- but people didn’t read them.

I first connected the ideas of the Renaissance and Web 2.0 last night. I was hanging out in #microformats, where there was some lively discussion going on, when things turned to Web history.

  1. DanC: hey now… spacer gifs are not web1 technology. I dunno what the heck they are, but please don’t call them web 1
  2. Tantek: i didn’t
  3. DanC:*was responding to kingryan*
  4. kingryan: Danc: I know
  5. _limbo_: space tags are making do with web1 deficiencies
  6. kingryan: limbo has a point
  7. DanC: the original web browsers (for nextstep and linemode) had stylesheets.
  8. DanC: stylesheets got left off the program for Mosaic and Netscape 1 to 4, but they were there with web 1.0
  9. kingryan: it seems to me that alot of what we call “web 1.0″ (for lack of a better term), was really a regression from the original work
  10. kingryan: but I can’t say this from experience, just reading
  11. DanC: ouch. how about “the web dark ages”. not “web 1.0″, please.
  12. kingryan: ooooh
  13. _limbo_: sounds better
  14. kingryan: much better

(people: DanC, Tantek, kingryan, limbo)

Those familiar with the history of the Web realize that many of the so-called innovations of “Web 2.0″ were actually present in original version of the web as conceived and build by Tim Berners-Lee, et al. The original browser was read-write, had stylesheets and encourages structured markup.

Web 1.0 was really a regression from the original ideas, in Web 2.0, we’re just getting back to the original ideas and applications.

I don’t know who we should blame for the Dark Ages, but I’m sure you can think of some. :D