It's great innit So well observed ..
"Why bother with accessibility? ... Because deep down you know that the web is attractive to people who aren't exactly like you." - Joe Clark
after hitting disable->disable styles to keep myself from vomiting, I at least got something presentable... I think it's really better off with the 'unsightly' unstyled content.<!-- to correct the unsightly Flash of Unstyled Content. http://www.bluerobot.com/web/css/fouc.asp -->
maybe I'm just being mean?
I do appreciate that even beginners are starting to apply web and accessibility standards to their pages, though...
Last edited by cfc; 01-18-2005 at 05:18 PM.
nope, wasn't getting that. I see it now, though... I thought some poor newb decided to start a site dedicated to web standards, implementing them in the worst ways possible to show how great they were. Definetely funny after figuring out that I was looking at it the wrong wayOriginally Posted by Graft-Creative
Well you could put it like that...Originally Posted by weazel
Oh sod... Do I still have Comic Sans MS installed?
heh, the funny thing is that they have almost identical XHTML code and text, just a different stylesheet applied (the only diff in the xhtml is a few links).Originally Posted by weazel
I didn't notice earlier because I didn't feel like comparing the two...
Ha! I had a feeling that design would make use of the infamous Comic Sans...Originally Posted by Error 404
Classic design, it reminds me of '96
I take no responsibility for the above nonsense.
Goes to show that use of standards, semantic markup and CSS alone does not guarantee that a site will look good, too.
I was thinking: anyone for a "CSS Zany Garden" contest? Using the original markup and CSS to create a really awful design? Although it would be hard to top the original...