does this annoy you?

[Hyperblaze]

When someone calls themselves a web developer and all they've done is created a website in HTML?

To me, that just gives web developers a bad name. Hell, even someone who coded a site in asp/php and did a horrible job at it gives web developers a bad name.

ps: yes I saw a site built in HTML and the designer was calling themselves a web developer.

Even if it's static, at least use a different file extension other then html to pretend it's dynamic content!

/rant

 

[reverend boltron]

I can understand where you're coming from on that. But if they're actively updating the site, then I wouldn't be too miffed. I wouldn't really be too miffed in the first place. They have no control over my identity, and I might end up taking the person's clients one day if they decide to stop web developing.

On a separate note though... I used to train in Brazilian Jiu Jitsu a lot, and I gave a guy two lessons and since then he tells everyone that he does Brazilian Jiu Jitsu. I think that was like five years ago that I gave him the lessons. That irritated me for a while, but then I realized that if he kept on telling people that, eventually someone would either pick a fight with him, wanna roll with him, or he would end up getting into a fight anyway, and once he got owned, he would stop saying he did BJJ.

You will find that life is more enjoyable when you begin encouraging the ones who are weak, helping them to get strong, instead of getting annoyed. It isn't worth your peace being stolen from you.

 

[Woosta]

My personal "cant stand / hate" web dev list.

PHP, ASP
Ugly parameters in paths (eg ?page=index)
Unsemantic, presentational markup
File extensions for web pages served as text/html
XHTML being served as text/html
XHTML in general
Untabbed code
Comments containing begin/end for division elements
Forms with no corresponding labels to form controls
Inline styles
Line break elements being used as spacing
Useless elements to clear floats
Variables in the global namespace in js
Inclusion of 10 or more scripts
Accessing objects via DOM 0 syntax
Non-use of closures
eval method and strings fed to setTimeout/setInterval
Use of alert method for debugging
+250KB homepage
300KB .swf masthead
Someone calling themselves a professional when they use a WYSIWYG
Presentational class names, elements, attributes
Misuse of inheritance, extraneous elements
Using a whole 50KB ES3 library for a simple functionality
Websites developed only for IE that look like sh!t on a standards browser such as S3/O9 or FX2

And FYI there are two types of web developers, front end and backend, so technically a front end developer can call himself a web developer, if he/she
develops (html) for the web.

 

[troytime]

it used to, but i've learned to not be affected by that anymore

i think the term 'development' can be stretched to describe the more advanced html coding

so when someone calls themselves a developer, i take it with a grain of salt no matter what. even if they are using some server side language.

 

[Woosta]

^
HTML isn't advanced, like sgml/xml it is pretty much common sense, I guess you're talking about using elements normal people never use (tbody/tfoot/thead/colspan/acronym/abbr/blockquote with p/dl/dt/dd/), or just advanced structure.

I agree with the last statement.

 

[troytime]

Originally posted by: Woosta
^
HTML isn't advanced, like sgml/xml it is pretty much common sense, I guess you're talking about using elements normal people never use (tbody/tfoot/thead/colspan/acronym/abbr/blockquote with p/dl/dt/dd/), or just advanced structure.

I agree with the last statement.

html isn't advanced - yes

but there's a huge difference between knowing how to format some text and knowing how to build a layout and tweaking every little space and size

 

[drebo]

Originally posted by: Woosta
Websites developed only for IE that look like sh!t on a standards browser such as S3/O9 or FX2

My number one pet peeve is people who think that Firefox is more standards compiant than IE.

It's not.

They both chose different parts of the standards to ignore and it affects both sides.

That being said, I've found it far easier to develop standards compliant designs that look good in IE than in Firefox, and I'm sure that if you stop developing designs specifically for Firefox, you'll find that's the case as well. Basically, IE7 represents the standard far better than Firefox 2 does.

Of course, IE's rendering engine has always been superior to Mozilla in terms of speed and quality (not necessarily compliancy, but it's always looked and behaved better).

 

[JACKDRUID]

development is more of a SDLC.... meaning design and execution, if the developer is able to make the site easy to modify while functioning correctly, I don't see anything wrong with that....

developer != coder...

 

[xtknight]

Originally posted by: drebo

Originally posted by: Woosta
Websites developed only for IE that look like sh!t on a standards browser such as S3/O9 or FX2

My number one pet peeve is people who think that Firefox is more standards compiant than IE.

It's not.

They both chose different parts of the standards to ignore and it affects both sides.

That being said, I've found it far easier to develop standards compliant designs that look good in IE than in Firefox, and I'm sure that if you stop developing designs specifically for Firefox, you'll find that's the case as well. Basically, IE7 represents the standard far better than Firefox 2 does.

Of course, IE's rendering engine has always been superior to Mozilla in terms of speed and quality (not necessarily compliancy, but it's always looked and behaved better).

Hmmm I find this interesting. I have had much better luck matching W3C standards and having my page look proper in Firefox. IE seems to have adopted Microsoft's standards, not the W3C. FF/Opera/Safari/Konqueror deviate very little in rendering when I test the sites that I have made, but IE6 and IE7 have the tendency to do random things when you give them W3C code instead of MS code.

Is there a W3 standard for the HTML 4.01, XHTML 1.0, XML, and SVG spaces that IE7 supports, which FireFox 3.0 does not?

Originally posted by: Woosta
XHTML being served as text/html

I used to be guilty of this (and still am if you visit some of the pages I've ever made), but I don't call myself a web dev either.

 

[slugg]

meh...

I do hate it when web developers claim to be software devs

 

[Hyperblaze]

Originally posted by: slugg
meh...

I do hate it when web developers claim to be software devs

The day that I cannot achieve the desired result in PHP that you can do in C++, I'll stop calling myself a software developer.

Key word being result.

Might not do it the exact same method, but the result will be the same.

 

[Crusty]

It's just a title IMO. Who cares, I could say that I'm the President of the US and it won't mean anything.

 

[slugg]

^^ how can you be the president if I'M THE PRESIDENT?

 

[Crusty]

Originally posted by: slugg
^^ how can you be the president if I'M THE PRESIDENT?

You can take it, I never wanted to be the president anyways!

 

[Markbnj]

As long as you guys remember that the president reports to me... THE KING.

 

[Schadenfroh]

Originally posted by: Markbnj
As long as you guys remember that the president reports to me... THE KING.

But, that is just a figurehead after all. I have the real power as LORD PROTECTOR.

 

[nobody554]

(Back on topic)

I have to be careful sometimes and catch myself calling my web developing "programming". It'd probably be much better to call it "coding"...yet, I have trouble remembering that.

 

[TheEarthWillShake]

I like to think that I am a web developer although I'm 100% sure if you guys read my code you would make fun of me haha.

 

[Hyperblaze]

Originally posted by: TheEarthWillShake
I like to think that I am a web developer although I'm 100% sure if you guys read my code you would make fun of me haha.

We all started somewhere, I'd laugh and curse at my own code that I've written a while back.

 

[CTho9305]

Even if it's static, at least use a different file extension other then html to pretend it's dynamic content!

Static files are underrated.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: Hyperblaze

Originally posted by: slugg
meh...

I do hate it when web developers claim to be software devs

The day that I cannot achieve the desired result in PHP that you can do in C++, I'll stop calling myself a software developer.

Key word being result.

Might not do it the exact same method, but the result will be the same.

There are other types of systems/applications that PHP is worthless on. either not supported or unable to accomplish what is needed. If not supported, then it would because, it has been determined to be to weak or impractical.
Embedded & realtime are two examples.

 

[Hyperblaze]

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy

Originally posted by: Hyperblaze

Originally posted by: slugg
meh...

I do hate it when web developers claim to be software devs

The day that I cannot achieve the desired result in PHP that you can do in C++, I'll stop calling myself a software developer.

Key word being result.

Might not do it the exact same method, but the result will be the same.

There are other types of systems/applications that PHP is worthless on. either not supported or unable to accomplish what is needed. If not supported, then it would because, it has been determined to be to weak or impractical.
Embedded & realtime are two examples.

real life example of a web application inside of an embedded system....

a router.

 

[Crusty]

Originally posted by: Hyperblaze

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy

Originally posted by: Hyperblaze

Originally posted by: slugg
meh...

I do hate it when web developers claim to be software devs

The day that I cannot achieve the desired result in PHP that you can do in C++, I'll stop calling myself a software developer.

Key word being result.

Might not do it the exact same method, but the result will be the same.

There are other types of systems/applications that PHP is worthless on. either not supported or unable to accomplish what is needed. If not supported, then it would because, it has been determined to be to weak or impractical.
Embedded & realtime are two examples.

real life example of a web application inside of an embedded system....

a router.

Except that your php isn't running the embedded device...

 

[troytime]

Originally posted by: nobody554
(Back on topic)

I have to be careful sometimes and catch myself calling my web developing "programming". It'd probably be much better to call it "coding"...yet, I have trouble remembering that.

i call myself a programmer
html is certainly not a programming language

but php and all the other server side languages are

 

[slugg]

Originally posted by: Crusty

Originally posted by: Hyperblaze

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy

Originally posted by: Hyperblaze

Originally posted by: slugg
meh...

I do hate it when web developers claim to be software devs

The day that I cannot achieve the desired result in PHP that you can do in C++, I'll stop calling myself a software developer.

Key word being result.

Might not do it the exact same method, but the result will be the same.

There are other types of systems/applications that PHP is worthless on. either not supported or unable to accomplish what is needed. If not supported, then it would because, it has been determined to be to weak or impractical.
Embedded & realtime are two examples.

real life example of a web application inside of an embedded system....

a router.

Except that your php isn't running the embedded device...

A bit of topic, but...

Additionally, how does one write digital imaging algorithms in PHP? How does one interface with hardware in PHP? How long would a discrete wavelet transform take on a 5 megapixel image in PHP? Is that even possible to do?

^^ I'm seriously asking these questions as I really don't know the answers. I'm not a web developer. I do know that every day things, such as the operation of a digital camera, needs a lot of what PHP does not offer. To say that PHP can provide the same results as C/C++ is inaccurate, in my opinion.