Vitamin Web Resource
Moderator: General Moderators
- feyd
- Neighborhood Spidermoddy
- Posts: 31559
- Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 3:24 pm
- Location: Bothell, Washington, USA
A more detailed description would have been nice. I almost trashed this thread.
What is Vitamin?
The web has undoubtedly entered a new and exciting phase. Designers, developers and entrepreneurs are energized, refueled and producing some mind-blowing projects. The buzz is most definitely back! Vitamin is a brand new online magazine dedicated to that new web industry.
Vitamin will inspire you, teach you, advise you and sometimes test you with its in-depth features, audio interviews, training sessions and reviews.
It's updated every week, and it's free! So whether you just want to get dirty with the code or plan to topple Google with your next cunning web app idea, Vitamin is your new best friend.
-
d3ad1ysp0rk
- Forum Donator
- Posts: 1661
- Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2003 8:31 pm
- Location: Maine, USA
- Chris Corbyn
- Breakbeat Nuttzer
- Posts: 13098
- Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2004 7:57 am
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
I did pretty much the same.. over a month ago. I offered to contribute an article, but received no response.d11wtq wrote:I've just sent them a question to ask if they want some guys from the PHP community to contribute a little content since it doesn't look to have grown massively thus far. I'd love to dig in and write a few articles and I guess some other people may do.
- Chris Corbyn
- Breakbeat Nuttzer
- Posts: 13098
- Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2004 7:57 am
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
I thought their concentration was on design, not on programming, but they seemed to have branched off into AJAX and Ruby. Makes me think there's a Mac devotee behind the site construct which tends not to bode well for other choices of topics (no Java section either). To piggyback on the last comment, new articles do seem to be pretty slow, but they are regular (once a week). I'd think with 11 authors on the site though they could manage a few more than that I dare say.
Well, if they would respond to emails *at all*, they definitely could at least increase their overall count.Moocat wrote:To piggyback on the last comment, new articles do seem to be pretty slow, but they are regular (once a week). I'd think with 11 authors on the site though they could manage a few more than that I dare say.
They didn't even send a rejection email. Talk about inconsiderate.
- Chris Corbyn
- Breakbeat Nuttzer
- Posts: 13098
- Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2004 7:57 am
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- jayshields
- DevNet Resident
- Posts: 1912
- Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2005 12:11 pm
- Location: Leeds/Manchester, England
Can I just take this thread slightly off-topic (because I found webstandards.org through thinkvitamin.org) by saying why do websites go out of their way to give a standards compliancy link when they aren't valid?
http://www.webstandards.org is one.
http://www.everah.com is two I've seen just today.
Why not just take the link off and still try to keep it compliant. Personally, I think the links are cocky, and without the website being valid I think it's a bit embarrassing.
http://www.webstandards.org is one.
http://www.everah.com is two I've seen just today.
Why not just take the link off and still try to keep it compliant. Personally, I think the links are cocky, and without the website being valid I think it's a bit embarrassing.
- Chris Corbyn
- Breakbeat Nuttzer
- Posts: 13098
- Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2004 7:57 am
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
The links aren't cocky. They are there to show your users that you've taken the care to be compliant (which brings about accessibility).jayshields wrote:Can I just take this thread slightly off-topic (because I found webstandards.org through thinkvitamin.org) by saying why do websites go out of their way to give a standards compliancy link when they aren't valid?
http://www.webstandards.org is one.
http://www.everah.com is two I've seen just today.
Why not just take the link off and still try to keep it compliant. Personally, I think the links are cocky, and without the website being valid I think it's a bit embarrassing.
Some sites are tricky to keep compliant. Blogs for example and anything where the public can post information pretty quickly end up with some wort of hiccup.
- jayshields
- DevNet Resident
- Posts: 1912
- Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2005 12:11 pm
- Location: Leeds/Manchester, England
Maybe cocky was a strong word. Trying not to blow it out of proportion, it's like telling someone you're going to win a race, and then losing it, or telling someone you've already won the race, but you didn't. Why not just let them find out who won the race themselves if they're so interested?d11wtq wrote:The links aren't cocky. They are there to show your users that you've taken the care to be compliant (which brings about accessibility).jayshields wrote:Can I just take this thread slightly off-topic (because I found webstandards.org through thinkvitamin.org) by saying why do websites go out of their way to give a standards compliancy link when they aren't valid?
http://www.webstandards.org is one.
http://www.everah.com is two I've seen just today.
Why not just take the link off and still try to keep it compliant. Personally, I think the links are cocky, and without the website being valid I think it's a bit embarrassing.
Some sites are tricky to keep compliant. Blogs for example and anything where the public can post information pretty quickly end up with some wort of hiccup.
Ok, if you spent time and effort making you're website standards compliant, and you want to show it off, by all means do it, it's your website; I would do the same. Onjthe other hand, if it's hard to keep it compliant like you said for example on a blog, don't bother with the link.