Dave Winer says “The WaSP guys aren’t interested, because as designers, their livelihood depends on it being hard for users to create content.” I’m a WaSP guy and my life is devoted to making things easier.
Dave Winer says “The WaSP guys aren’t interested, because as designers, their livelihood depends on it being hard for users to create content.” I’m a WaSP guy and my life is devoted to making things easier.
Not only do WaSPs initiatives make it easier for me to work on the web, WaSP has made the web a better place. Thanks for everything you and WaSP are doing and have done. And thanks especially for WordPress.
Wow, that’s a really interesting statement for Dave to make. The few problems I’ve had with the WaSP arose because I didn’t think they were thinking enough about design and too much about code.
Serves you right for listening to Winer.
Dave constantly manages to suprise me with the stream of rubbish he can produce. He needs beating with the clue stick if you ask me. 😉
Yeah – that is total rubbish. Anyone can pick up a paint brush and paint but not everyone is an artist, the man is a fool.
I’m a WaSP, and I’ve never called myself a designer in my life!
I’m a moose, and I swat WaSPs every chance I can get! :p
That said, I think giving Whiney, er, Winer a link is giving him far too much credibility. I’ll check it out because I’m bored and tired…or is that tired and bored?
I think the Web is a two-way medium and a browser that can’t create pages as easily as it browses them is just half a browser.
Browsing is what a browser does, that is by definition a one-way process.
I’m amazed he even wrote that without catching himself. A text editor in a browser isn’t a bad idea though, it could function much like the quick tags do in WP. However I’d call the WP post interface “a decent little text editor” – not a Word Processor, but a decent little text editor.
Basically he’s not engaging his brain before he types. The bloggers curse.
You guys haven’t bothered to read what I wrote, have you? ;->
And Matt is just one guy on WaSP. If he actually listens to and understands the needs of users, that’s good for WaSP. But he’s just one member, and hey I’m not so sure he actually gets it. If you look at how they did enclosures in WordPress, you may see what I mean.
Anyway, good luck turning WaSP around, Matt, if that’s what you’re intending to do.
Warning, this is gonna be harsh and immature….
Winer is a bitter clueless dick. Big surprise.
No need to pick on Dave guys, I think he’s wrong but that doesn’t mean he’s a bad guy.
Dave, the goal of WaSP wouldn’t be so much as to push rich-text editing on browsers, as they already all have that, but to encourage them to implement it in a standard way so if you were taking advantage of that feature you wouldn’t have to branch your code for each browser.
You should check out the widgEditor which does a decent job at providing a rich-text interface and also produces clean, standards-compliant code which works well across platforms:
http://www.themaninblue.com/experiment/widgEditor/
There seems to be some confusion here. HTTP/1.1 was designed to both view and modify/creat resources in a similar way to what Winer suggests. Also, at current there are not an awful lot of browsers which support the vast array of HTTP methods to there fullest extent – but in a similar way, there are not a lot of servers that implement it either.
I have a browser on my machine which can read, edit, create and move resources. It’s called the subversion command line client and it uses Web DAV. This uses HTTP legally within the limits of the RFC. This is a great use of HTTP if you ask me, but as of yet – this kind of functionality just hasn’t been realised for your More popular user agent, such as Firefox, Mozilla Opera etc.
Dave is misguided in his comments against the WaSP because this is not a standards/accessibility issue. Browsers are not breaking and W3C standards, they are simply not implementing part of the HTTP/1.1 RFC ([RFC 2616, Sec. 5.1.1 http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2616.txt%5D they deem to not be in popular use on web sites.
And I for one agree with them.
I challenge Dave to point out one site that supports more than half of the following HTTP methods:
OPTIONS GET HEAD POST PUT DELETE TRACE CONNECT
This is not flamebate, I am genuinely interested to see if there are any WWW sites which don’t work in common browsers because of this.
I’ve taken too many Women’s/Gender studies courses during my college career because I initially read that and thought, “What does being a White Anglo-Saxon Protestant have anything to do with that?” So, yeah…random factoid for that day.
i’m with cyndy on this one. i was like, huh whhhaaa?
Random fact of the day: factoid technically means “resembling a fact”, but unverified or inaccurate.
Just sayin’.
(I’m terribly amused by the above comment.) Well, I never said WASP was a dictionary term or even specifically a real acronym for anything – it’s just one of those terms you throw around in Women’s Studies all the time and then say to people and have them go, “Huh?”
Glad I wasn’t alone in wondering why these folks were picking on those White Anglo-Saxon Protestants… grew up one myself, tho now, as a recovering Calvinist (an RC convert) I suppose I’m a WASC. Still – I like web standards as a group, despite a dislike for some individual standards.
Yeesha, Matt, if ever there was a time for rel=”nofollow”, it was here. ;P
Dave will always be Dave, that’s his way of entertaining people. At the end of the day, we’re all in the business of “whoring” for others. Some people do it by writing free code, some write poetry on their blogs, and some do it like Dave Winer.