Bite my bytes

What bugs me, always, is not paying attention to the standards! Again. What is it with you Microsoft developers? Sorry if the page was not created by MS.si developers and I appologize for the outburst then, but come on. Doctype is set to XHTML transitional and even in the header of the HTML document there's no XML like tags. And the basic   characters are put down wrong. Don't push something you don't know about and stick to what you do know and do that as best as you can. If they son't know how to put up a site they should let someone do it who knows how to do it. This does not go out to you David.

But all in all, it's good for community and to share the ideas. Hopefully. That's the point of the site, right? Anyway, I have breakfast (uf, more like a brunch) to eat.

I completely agree with you, Mark. I didn't bother looking at the source, I was happy that the page look quite ok in Firefox.

Yes, it good for the community and I hope that's the idea with the portal. And bon apetit!

Mark: "If they son't know how to put up a site they should let someone do it who knows how to do it"
Shees. You are free to put up a community website if you want to. Anyway, what exactly is your problem? Is page incorectly shown?

David: EMEA CodeZone is build on older version of CodeZone. BTW, SLODUG team didn't get any feedback from you. Where did you send it?

Thanks both for good wishes.

Miha
SLODUG

Miha: I sent mail at 12:18 to "admin@codezone-si.info", I used the Stik link ob the bottom of the page. If you don't get it I can resend it.

It's not that the page is not shown properly but the fact that not following the standards can lead to great incompatibilities and money spending in the future. Being that the tendencies to connect/merge different information systems are more and more here to be done and if you're gonna code like that in any language (be it HTML, C++, Java, VB...whatever) you're soon to be bound to redo the whole code because it's not compatible with something else. I'm not just saying this becuase of the way the website is built. I'm speaking generaly. And when someone does a crappy job the customer is not pleased with it and then hires someone else to redo it for them and to top it all off their demand is to repair the existing code and not do it from scratch. That's my problem, when you have to repair the code that someone else wrote. It takes just too long to just figure out what certain class, method does and only then you can make it better when you could do the same thing from scratch in half that time.
And for the website, just put the old HTML 4.01 doctype in there. Don't push XHTML it if you don't know how to use it. I believe the old doctype would go through easily (with some minor changes).

I don't mind you putting up a community website/portal, not at all. I think it's great! I congratulate you for that and for open conversation and open source communities and even what you guys started. I might even sign up :) and participate even though I don't like MS platform (no reason in particular). And as I said before, I appologize for the outburst if the site wasn't done by you guys but as I saw it was copyrighted MS stuff and I assume it's you gueys then. You know what I'm saying? I don't go off about Davids site nor any other blogger site in the si.blogs list because I know it's not their work so it's not really up to them and I have no right busting their balls since I should be busting the .Text and Blogger developers balls for not doing their job properly.

Hope your portal gets as many hits and exposure you desire. And again I have nothing against the site being put up, just the way it's doctyped and then not following the standards. Chin up and go out catch some sun. There will be plenty of nihgt time to code. :)

bit offtopic here, but David, I read you tried to work with mono... if you ever have some time again to play with it... http://www.codeproject.com/cpnet/introtomono1.asp

Tnx for Mono link. I saw that Sasa also wrote about it. I have to give FC3+Mono another try...
http://82.192.39.191/dasBlog/default.aspx?date=2005-01-14

There's a discussion going on here and here about the new SLODUG portal , which was recently put up by

There's a discussion going on here and here about the new SLODUG portal , which was recently put