<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Ready for May 1st?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.devlounge.net/design/ready-for-may-1st/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.devlounge.net/design/ready-for-may-1st</link>
	<description>Design, Develop, and Grow</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 09:03:06 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ranjani</title>
		<link>http://www.devlounge.net/design/ready-for-may-1st/comment-page-1#comment-39696</link>
		<dc:creator>Ranjani</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 May 2007 03:35:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.devlounge.net/articles/ready-for-may-1st#comment-39696</guid>
		<description>The invalid sites really bothered me. If the entire point of the reboot is to redesign with &quot;standards&quot;, part of which includes well-formed markup, why did so many sites not succeed (or not bother to)?

I think most of it is either laziness or stubbornness. To first time participants, the whole idea of doing a timed reboot is pretty scary (my first time will probably be this time next year, just in time for college :)), and just finishing the design and making it look like the mental picture they have is the hardest part. So they don&#039;t try after a certain point, as if to say, &quot;What more do you want of me?&quot;

For designers, however, trying to keep that picture intact is sometimes more important than keeping the body of the design intact, which is a major failing in my opinion. Designers should be able to embrace both standards and beauty in one, and that&#039;s what the reboot is all about.

I think it&#039;s going to be great. The outpouring of criticism over last year&#039;s ridiculous flop of a standards reboot should set some people straight this year. And in addition, to make everything better, hope that &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.avalonstar.com&quot; title=&quot;Velosoooooo!&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;a certain someone&lt;/a&gt; will surprise us tomorrow :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The invalid sites really bothered me. If the entire point of the reboot is to redesign with &#8220;standards&#8221;, part of which includes well-formed markup, why did so many sites not succeed (or not bother to)?</p>
<p>I think most of it is either laziness or stubbornness. To first time participants, the whole idea of doing a timed reboot is pretty scary (my first time will probably be this time next year, just in time for college <img src='http://www.devlounge.net/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> ), and just finishing the design and making it look like the mental picture they have is the hardest part. So they don&#8217;t try after a certain point, as if to say, &#8220;What more do you want of me?&#8221;</p>
<p>For designers, however, trying to keep that picture intact is sometimes more important than keeping the body of the design intact, which is a major failing in my opinion. Designers should be able to embrace both standards and beauty in one, and that&#8217;s what the reboot is all about.</p>
<p>I think it&#8217;s going to be great. The outpouring of criticism over last year&#8217;s ridiculous flop of a standards reboot should set some people straight this year. And in addition, to make everything better, hope that <a href="http://www.avalonstar.com" title="Velosoooooo!" rel="nofollow">a certain someone</a> will surprise us tomorrow <img src='http://www.devlounge.net/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

