Author Topic: HTML...In Britsh? (Read 20721 times)

KynloStephen66515 · « **on:** January 29, 2010, 09:31 AM »

Anybody else want to be able to code HTML in BRITISH?

I'm now bored of having to mis-spell words like 'colour' <---- even as i type, my browser is telling me i have mis-spelled that

I could go on and on about it, but I'm not going to.

Just a simple rant I know, and if it seems like it should be in a different area, then please feel free to move/delete it!

Curious if there is anybody else who wants this also!

f0dder · « **Reply #1 on:** January 29, 2010, 11:06 AM »

Anybody else want to be able to code HTML in BRITISH?
-Stephen66515 (January 29, 2010, 09:31 AM)

Not really, no - it would be messy if the standard supported both spellings. What would you expect to happen if a tag specified both "color" and "colour"? As long as it's consistent, either way is fine... but supporting both or mixing? Ugh.

KynloStephen66515 · « **Reply #2 on:** January 29, 2010, 11:11 AM »

I see your thinking, I just prefer to code in my native tongue and not, what is essentially a foreign language...

I'm just glad that there are no tags that require me to type 'Aluminium'

app103 · « **Reply #3 on:** January 29, 2010, 11:18 AM »

Just be glad you are not Japanese or something. At least the English you code in resembles your native language, somewhat.

Or if HTML was created in Japanese and not English. Then you'd really be confused by having to type "色" instead of "color".

KynloStephen66515 · « **Reply #4 on:** January 29, 2010, 11:22 AM »

haha true enough, you get what I mean though when I say I'd like to code in my own language, but until that day, I shall count my blessings that HTML was not invented by someone from Japan, China or any other eastern country.

Eóin · « **Reply #5 on:** January 29, 2010, 01:13 PM »

Ruby was invented by a Japanese man, he still opted for English keywords though.

KynloStephen66515 · « **Reply #6 on:** January 30, 2010, 08:07 AM »

English, or BRITISH? (Seeing as Americans have stolen the term 'English' for what should be called 'American' or at very least 'Bastardised English')

Eóin · « **Reply #7 on:** January 30, 2010, 11:31 AM »

I too used to think the early Americans just couldn't spell but instead it seems the spelling of many words wasn't formalized back then. Later when dictionaries were compiled the two countries just settled on different spellings.

I'd guess Ruby would be American English but as it happens I don't think any of its keywords have different spelling. Perhaps the std library for it does though.

KynloStephen66515 · « **Reply #8 on:** January 30, 2010, 11:51 AM »

I too used to think the early Americans
-Eóin (January 30, 2010, 11:31 AM)

I was more thinking of modern day American's. I get a little irritated how most (not all) choose to call their version of 'English' the original, when it clearly is not, also, how they choose to drop letters from certain words just because they cannot pronounce/will not learn how to pronounce it correctly (IE: Aluminium becoming Aluminum)

tomos · « **Reply #9 on:** January 30, 2010, 12:53 PM »

I too used to think the early Americans
-Eóin (January 30, 2010, 11:31 AM)

I was more thinking of modern day American's. I get a little irritated how most (not all) choose to call their version of 'English' the original, when it clearly is not, also, how they choose to drop letters from certain words just because they cannot pronounce/will not learn how to pronounce it correctly (IE: Aluminium becoming Aluminum)
-Stephen66515 (January 30, 2010, 11:51 AM)

it's interesting that many American words (and pronunciations) are the those that would have been used in England in the 17th/18th centuries - it was England that changed from e.g. Fall to Autumn. Of course it works the other way around too..
I'm not a fan of the spelling changes either, but suspect we might be totally appalled by the spelling of the future if certain spelling habits catch on (like as in txtng ur messge - although maybe predictive text will ward that one off!)

Tuxman · « **Reply #10 on:** January 30, 2010, 05:39 PM »

I shall count my blessings that HTML was not invented by someone from Japan, China or any other eastern country.
-Stephen66515 (January 29, 2010, 11:22 AM)

The WWW was invented in Switzerland, the computer was invented in Germany... so I guess you prefer talking German here?

Eóin · « **Reply #11 on:** January 30, 2010, 08:44 PM »

... their version of 'English' the original, when it clearly is not
-Stephen66515 (January 30, 2010, 11:51 AM)

Well actually my point was that prior to formalization neither was original and hence original doesn't apply.

Carol Haynes · « **Reply #12 on:** January 31, 2010, 09:10 AM »

the computer was invented in Germany
-Tuxman (January 30, 2010, 05:39 PM)

Only if you mean calculating machines. The first 'modern' all-purpose computer was built during World War II at Bletchley Park in the UK to crack German enigma codes. It was called Colossus and was built by the British Post Office Electronics engineer Tommy Flowers.

The first genuinely theoretical computer scientist was Alan Turing (who also worked at Bletchely Park).

See:

http://www.bletchley...ontent/machines.rhtm

and

http://www.alanturin...BriefHistofComp.html

(see the Universal Turing Machine a little way down the page).

Back on topic ...

I can't see why it would be impossible to have synonyms in HTML so that both color and colour are equivalent. That way people who learn English can use HTML without irritation and the Americans can carry on getting it wrong!

Tuxman · « **Reply #13 on:** January 31, 2010, 09:24 AM »

OK, so back to the localized languages then. Good old Office 95 supported German macros.

Darwin · « **Reply #14 on:** January 31, 2010, 09:36 AM »

I can't see why it would be impossible to have synonyms in HTML so that both color and colour are equivalent. That way people who learn English can use HTML without irritation and the Americans can carry on getting it wrong!
-Carol Haynes (January 31, 2010, 09:10 AM)

Dormouse · « **Reply #15 on:** January 31, 2010, 11:04 AM »

The WWW was invented in Switzerland
-Tuxman (January 30, 2010, 05:39 PM)

By an Englishman

Tuxman · « **Reply #16 on:** January 31, 2010, 11:10 AM »

... for worldwide usage, not language-dependent.

Darwin · « **Reply #17 on:** January 31, 2010, 11:14 AM »

... for worldwide usage, not language-dependent.
-Tuxman (January 31, 2010, 11:10 AM)

Well, yes... However, reality dictates that we must all be able to communicate with one another. It's one thing to have individual webpages localized, quite another to try to have the code underlying available in different languages or even dialects!

Tuxman · « **Reply #18 on:** January 31, 2010, 11:16 AM »

Code is not a language you communicate in, right?

f0dder · « **Reply #19 on:** January 31, 2010, 11:54 AM »

I can't see why it would be impossible to have synonyms in HTML so that both color and colour are equivalent. That way people who learn English can use HTML without irritation and the Americans can carry on getting it wrong!
-Carol Haynes (January 31, 2010, 09:10 AM)

It would be horrible. The language definition would bloat up, there's the already-mentioned issues if multiple spelling variants are used in a single tag, et cetera.

OK, so back to the localized languages then. Good old Office 95 supported German macros.
-Tuxman (January 31, 2010, 09:24 AM)

You mean keyword in German? Ugly ugly ugly. What happens when you try to use one of those macros in a non-German locale? And what about a non-German trying to read the macro? Plain silly. Already seen the problems it causes when silly products like Borland C++ Builder output dates/etc in internationalized form, and fail to read those back in another locale... localizing an entire language is even worse.

Code is not a language you communicate in, right?
-Tuxman (January 31, 2010, 11:16 AM)

It sure is - identifiers and comments.

Tuxman · « **Reply #20 on:** January 31, 2010, 12:00 PM »

You mean keyword in German? Ugly ugly ugly. What happens when you try to use one of those macros in a non-German locale?
-f0dder (January 31, 2010, 11:54 AM)

Never tried, but it was funny. ENDEWENN instead of ENDIF and such...

Code is not a language you communicate in, right?
-Tuxman (January 31, 2010, 11:16 AM)
It sure is - identifiers and comments.
-f0dder (January 31, 2010, 11:54 AM)

I didn't mean that.

Deozaan · « **Reply #21 on:** February 03, 2010, 05:39 AM »

Anybody else want to be able to code HTML in BRITISH?

I'm now bored of having to mis-spell words like 'colour' <---- even as i type, my browser is telling me i have mis-spelled that
-Stephen66515 (January 29, 2010, 09:31 AM)

<sarcastic ethnocentrism>

Oh but you have misspelled "color." You've got an extra "u" in there! You just need to learn how to spell English words the correct way and all your HTML problems will vanish like magic!

</sarcastic ethnocentrism>

Actually when I was in my first few years of grade school, I thought I was so smart and as a result on my spelling tests I'd add an extra "u" in words as is appropriate for British spelling. Naturally the teacher marked them wrong but when I protested she gave me full credit.

I guess I was kind of a smart aleck. (Maybe I still am...)

KynloStephen66515 · « **Reply #22 on:** February 03, 2010, 01:50 PM »

haha, but at the end of the day, you was correct, the American language should be exactly the same as the British one...I understand that accents would change the pronunciation of some words, but this does not require a total disregard of letters in certain words (Aluminium)!

Tuxman · « **Reply #23 on:** February 03, 2010, 02:12 PM »

Yep, so the Americans with their bubblegum accent should go back to British English. No-one forced them to split.

KynloStephen66515 · « **Reply #24 on:** February 03, 2010, 05:27 PM »

Yep, so the Americans with their bubblegum accent should go back to British English. No-one forced them to split.
-Tuxman (February 03, 2010, 02:12 PM)

tbh, i couldn't care less how they pronounce the word, or what their accent sounds like, as long as the spelling is correct!