From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.advocacy

The World Wide Web, based upon HTML, is the most idiotic medium
imaginable. It is inherently flexible but that flexibility makes
it inherently useless.

Proof is not required. Anyone who has tried to fashion a web site
"from scratch" has realized this after 5 minutes of toil.

Is there a solution? This guy is taking an excellent approach:

<https://www.cphysics.org/>

There is no ridiculous "fluid" markup that strives to accommodate
every conceivable viewport. There is only pure and unadulterated
information, which is after all the primary purpose of the Web.

Other open formats beside PDF also should be made available. Open
Documment Formats (ODF), as in LibreOffice, would be the natural choice.

PDF can embed audio and video and so to can ODF.

So who needs ridiculous HTML anymore?

Distributing information in this manner would also completely eliminate
that scourge of the Internet known as java(shit)script.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.advocacy

Le 20-12-2025, Diego Garcia <dg@linux.rocks> a écrit :

So who needs ridiculous HTML anymore?

First, learn the difference between binary and plain text. Then you'll understand why your message is stupid.
--
Si vous avez du temps à perdre :
https://scarpet42.gitlab.io
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.advocacy

On Dec 20, 2025 at 8:45:57 AM EST, "Stéphane CARPENTIER" <sc@fiat-linux.fr> wrote:

Le 20-12-2025, Diego Garcia <dg@linux.rocks> a écrit :

So who needs ridiculous HTML anymore?

First, learn the difference between binary and plain text. Then you'll understand why your message is stupid.

No, he will never know that ALL of his posts here are stupid. He is not smart enough to understand any aspect of programming.

The whole point of HTML is to make pages readable on anything. Farley Fucktard thinks "It looks good on MY screen, that's all that matters". This is the equivalent of a programmer saying "This code works on MY machine, so QA/the users must be doing something wrong."

Which is the thought process of a child. And as we all know, everytime he
posts something here he proves he IS a child.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.advocacy

On 20 Dec 2025 13:45:57 GMT, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:

First, learn the difference between binary and plain text. Then you'll understand why your message is stupid.

On GNU/Linux there is no difference.

Read and weep, loser:

https://www.gnu.org/software/libc/manual/html_node//Binary-Streams.html

"In the GNU C Library, and on all POSIX systems, there is no difference
between text streams and binary streams. When you open a stream, you get
the same kind of stream regardless of whether you ask for binary. This
stream can handle any file content, and has none of the restrictions
that text streams sometimes have."

YOU should learn the difference between superior (me) and inferior (you).

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.advocacy

On Sat, 20 Dec 2025 14:21:03 +0000, Tyrone wrote:

[snip total idiocy]

Anyone who makes "burger flipper" wages has absolutely no
credibility.

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.advocacy

On 2025-12-20, Diego Garcia <dg@linux.rocks> wrote:

The World Wide Web, based upon HTML, is the most idiotic medium
imaginable. It is inherently flexible but that flexibility makes
it inherently useless.

Proof is not required. Anyone who has tried to fashion a web site
"from scratch" has realized this after 5 minutes of toil.

Is there a solution? This guy is taking an excellent approach:

<https://www.cphysics.org/>

That page is written in HTML+CSS. I don't think it is hand written,
though. So it is almost a counter-proof to your theorem that HTML sucks.
No it does not. What sucks is the conversion modules in various word
processors that write over-complex and ugly HTML+CSS. There are too few
HTML editors that write nice clean HTML from a simplified markup.

I have always hand-written my HTML or generated it from PERL CGI
scripts, making it as simple as possible. For blog pages I did write a
markup scripts that allows me to focus on the content instead of the
markup, using things like this to create HTML tags as needed.
Blank lines turn into <P> tags.

*** H2 What's Up?
There is a lot to
*** LINK https://some.web.site/some/page learn
from good documentation
* You might get smarter
* You might avoid looking
stupid in front of your peers
- and you might gasin a reputation

I don't have any design sense, so my pages are never as clean as your
example, but they are functional.
--
Lars Poulsen - an old geek in Santa Barbara, California
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.advocacy

Le 20-12-2025, Diego Garcia <dg@linux.rocks> a écrit :

On 20 Dec 2025 13:45:57 GMT, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:

First, learn the difference between binary and plain text. Then you'll
understand why your message is stupid.

On GNU/Linux there is no difference.

Read and weep, loser:

https://www.gnu.org/software/libc/manual/html_node//Binary-Streams.html

"In the GNU C Library, and on all POSIX systems, there is no difference between text streams and binary streams. When you open a stream, you get
the same kind of stream regardless of whether you ask for binary. This
stream can handle any file content, and has none of the restrictions
that text streams sometimes have."

Let say if I wasn't seated, I'd fall on my ass. Are you that limited? I
can't believe it. Do you understand what you sent? I'm not speaking
about each word in sequence but on the overall meaning. Can you spot the difference between the way raw data is sent to a program and the way
that program is interpreting it?

YOU should learn the difference between superior (me) and inferior (you).

Yes, I can see that. maybe I'm asking to much from you. Do you know what
a stream is?
--
Si vous avez du temps à perdre :
https://scarpet42.gitlab.io
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.advocacy

On Sat, 20 Dec 2025 14:42:07 -0000 (UTC), Lars Poulsen wrote:

<https://www.cphysics.org/>

That page is written in HTML+CSS. I don't think it is hand written,
though. So it is almost a counter-proof to your theorem that HTML sucks.

That page is only a "container" that presents links for PDF documents.
It has to be written in HTML because that is the protocol for web servers.

But the actual content is delivered in the PDF format and that is the significant aspect.

Read his "style" page to discover his reasons:

<https://www.cphysics.org/style>

I would agree. Indeed, the majority of academic material is already distributed as PDF documents, using only an HTML "front page" to deliver
the links.

With PDF, or other open formats, there is no need for an author
to concern himself with the ridiculous task of accommodating
every possible viewport. This I have already stated.

For serious purposes, HTML *is* junk. It was spawned at a time when
PCs were very limited and could not present sophisticated audio/visual
content in a sophisticated manner. In many ways that is still very true,
and that's why javascript and WebAssembly have been introduced. But
these tools are mere "shoehorns" that never should have happened and
would be totally unnecessary if Web content were distributed as open
source file formats.

But it seems that you are some sort of web developer and thus you
may may feel that your livelihood is threatened by such suggestions.

However, I must always maintain an objectivity and it is my assessment
that the Web would be much improved if information would be distributed
as open formats that could be downloaded and displayed on a users machine
using local software rather than relying on HTML through a browser.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.advocacy

On Dec 20, 2025 at 9:42:07 AM EST, "Lars Poulsen" <lars@beagle-ears.com> wrote:

On 2025-12-20, Diego Garcia <dg@linux.rocks> wrote:

The World Wide Web, based upon HTML, is the most idiotic medium
imaginable. It is inherently flexible but that flexibility makes
it inherently useless.

Proof is not required. Anyone who has tried to fashion a web site
"from scratch" has realized this after 5 minutes of toil.

Is there a solution? This guy is taking an excellent approach:

<https://www.cphysics.org/>

That page is written in HTML+CSS. I don't think it is hand written,
though. So it is almost a counter-proof to your theorem that HTML sucks.
No it does not. What sucks is the conversion modules in various word processors that write over-complex and ugly HTML+CSS. There are too few
HTML editors that write nice clean HTML from a simplified markup.

It is clearly not hand-written, as there are things commented out:

/* This keeps the head fixed (no scroll),
but then the head extends too far to the right. Why??
Temporarily commented-out until I understand this...

No one writes code they don't understand and then have to comment out.


His example page is also using Javascript to download the PDF files. Way to go, Farley. Proving YET AGAIN you have no idea what is going on.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.advocacy

On 20 Dec 2025 14:55:28 GMT, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:

Yes, I can see that. maybe I'm asking to much from you. Do you know what
a stream is?

Hyperbole. Look it up, idiot.

But, I have had enough from you.

You are a total idiot that can contribute no meaningful discussion.

Get out of here and stay out. You are an embarrassment to the
GNU/Linux community.


--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.advocacy

On Dec 20, 2025 at 9:55:28 AM EST, "Stéphane CARPENTIER" <sc@fiat-linux.fr> wrote:

Le 20-12-2025, Diego Garcia <dg@linux.rocks> a écrit :

On 20 Dec 2025 13:45:57 GMT, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:

First, learn the difference between binary and plain text. Then you'll
understand why your message is stupid.

On GNU/Linux there is no difference.

Read and weep, loser:

https://www.gnu.org/software/libc/manual/html_node//Binary-Streams.html

"In the GNU C Library, and on all POSIX systems, there is no difference
between text streams and binary streams. When you open a stream, you get
the same kind of stream regardless of whether you ask for binary. This
stream can handle any file content, and has none of the restrictions
that text streams sometimes have."

Let say if I wasn't seated, I'd fall on my ass. Are you that limited? I
can't believe it. Do you understand what you sent? I'm not speaking
about each word in sequence but on the overall meaning. Can you spot the difference between the way raw data is sent to a program and the way
that program is interpreting it?

I too almost fell off my chair reading that. This is beyond pathetic.

YOU should learn the difference between superior (me) and inferior (you).

Yes, I can see that. maybe I'm asking to much from you. Do you know what
a stream is?

That is water flowing downhill, right? :-)
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.advocacy

Le 20-12-2025, Diego Garcia <dg@linux.rocks> a écrit :

With PDF, or other open formats,

Well, no. Once again you don't understand what you are claiming.
--
Si vous avez du temps à perdre :
https://scarpet42.gitlab.io
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.advocacy

On 20 Dec 2025 16:24:47 GMT, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:

Le 20-12-2025, Diego Garcia <dg@linux.rocks> a écrit :

With PDF, or other open formats,

Well, no. Once again you don't understand what you are claiming.

I will not tolerate a total idiot like you defacing my claims.

Let me reiterate:

I am MASTER. You are LACKEY.

Do not ever attempt to overturn my infallible statements with
your wretched lunacy.


--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.advocacy

["Followup-To:" header set to comp.os.linux.misc.]

<https://www.cphysics.org/>

On Sat, 20 Dec 2025 14:42:07 -0000 (UTC), Lars Poulsen wrote:

That page is written in HTML+CSS. I don't think it is hand written,
though. So it is almost a counter-proof to your theorem that HTML sucks.

On 2025-12-20, Diego Garcia <dg@linux.rocks> wrote:

That page is only a "container" that presents links for PDF documents.
It has to be written in HTML because that is the protocol for web servers.

But the actual content is delivered in the PDF format and that is the significant aspect.

Read his "style" page to discover his reasons:
<https://www.cphysics.org/style>
I would agree. Indeed, the majority of academic material is already distributed as PDF documents, using only an HTML "front page" to deliver
the links.

With PDF, or other open formats, there is no need for an author
to concern himself with the ridiculous task of accommodating
every possible viewport. This I have already stated.

For serious purposes, HTML *is* junk. It was spawned at a time when
PCs were very limited and could not present sophisticated audio/visual content in a sophisticated manner. In many ways that is still very true,
and that's why javascript and WebAssembly have been introduced. But
these tools are mere "shoehorns" that never should have happened and
would be totally unnecessary if Web content were distributed as open
source file formats.

But it seems that you are some sort of web developer and thus you
may may feel that your livelihood is threatened by such suggestions.

However, I must always maintain an objectivity and it is my assessment
that the Web would be much improved if information would be distributed
as open formats that could be downloaded and displayed on a users machine using local software rather than relying on HTML through a browser.

On the contrary, I am NOT a web developer, and I when I put up things on
the web, I do not care about formatting: I make it as simple as I can,
in the same kind of "wall of text with a few embedded images" that was
the norm in 1995. No JavaScript, no PHP; if I need backend code, it is
a simple Perl script that generates simple, primitive HTML. I do not
even use CSS.
--
Lars Poulsen - an old geek in Santa Barbara, California
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.advocacy

On 2025-12-20 17:33, Diego Garcia wrote:

On 20 Dec 2025 16:24:47 GMT, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:

Le 20-12-2025, Diego Garcia <dg@linux.rocks> a écrit :

With PDF, or other open formats,

Well, no. Once again you don't understand what you are claiming.

I will not tolerate a total idiot like you defacing my claims.

Let me reiterate:

I am MASTER. You are LACKEY.

Do not ever attempt to overturn my infallible statements with
your wretched lunacy.

Ho, ho! Mad as a hatter...
--
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.advocacy

On Sat, 20 Dec 2025 14:42:07 -0000 (UTC), Lars Poulsen wrote:

I have always hand-written my HTML or generated it from PERL CGI
scripts, making it as simple as possible.

A friend had this table of info in a web page. I condensed the table
down to some JavaScript structures, and added a script which generated
the HTML rendering when the page loaded. The result was much smaller
than the original page, hence quicker to load.

I also added buttons in the column headings so the user could sort the
entries by any of those headings. All done by JavaScript entirely in
the browser, so as far as the server was concerned, it was a “static”
web page.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.advocacy

On 20 Dec 2025 13:45:57 GMT, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:

Le 20-12-2025, Diego Garcia <dg@linux.rocks> a écrit :

So who needs ridiculous HTML anymore?

First, learn the difference between binary and plain text. Then you'll understand why your message is stupid.

I've done many interfaces to third party applications. A memorable one was when I was discussing their API with the 'engineer' and realized he didn't know the difference. 'Oh, this project is going to be fun' I thought.

This was at step one. In most protocols someplace in the header there is a count of the bytes in the payload. Sometimes it is an ASCII string like
'9254' or it might be a binary value using htonl().
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.advocacy

In article <pan$1354a$29dba635$1499bedc$32bd2208@linux.rocks>,
Diego Garcia <dg@linux.rocks> wrote:

There is only pure and unadulterated information, which is after all
the primary purpose of the Web.

To be fair, though, PDFs aren't just pure information--there's a ton of
layout data in there, too. XML would be purer. And, arguably, HTML is
purer data.

So who needs ridiculous HTML anymore?

Screen readers, for one.
--
Brian "Beej Jorgensen" Hall | beej@beej.us
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.advocacy

On Tue, 23 Dec 2025 00:48:46 -0000 (UTC), Beej Jorgensen wrote:

To be fair, though, PDFs aren't just pure information--there's a ton of layout data in there, too. XML would be purer. And, arguably, HTML is
purer data.

Of course. PDF is derived from PostScript which is a Page Description Language.

But the "layout data" is generated entirely with software and
need not concern the author who is thereby free to concentrate
on the pure information.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2