@lepidotós The full 1.1 spec is a theoretical maximum, not a base standard. One may code exclusively in HTML3 / CSS1, or even use no CSS at all and just HTML1 if they wish, and still be fully compliant. What would
not qualify for Web 1.1 certification on the other hand, is emulating places like YouTube, Facebook, Wix, etc. on the framework and / or security side.
I know that people have used authoring packages such as Rapidweaver, iWeb, and others to build their websites, but from the beginning, I personally chose to hand-write all of reFlash's ~204 (and counting) web pages from the ground up. And I still maintain them all by hand, because even the authoring software packages of the time are still too unoptimized in general for my taste.
With that said, your mileage may vary.
-
In any case, I've noticed in recent times that it turns out that "Web 1.1" is essentially just a more developed iteration of a broader pre-existing phenomenon comprised of what (usually) seems to be an army of teenagers to twenty-somethings yearning for a time when the Web was simpler and not anywhere near as corrupt; and completely understandably so, as Big Tech and Big Data has ruined everything in the last 10+ years they've taken root.
So in regards to the SpaceHey old web sites, I think in the end, we all want the same thing - and that is very good, because there is strength in numbers. If this underground phenomenon continues to pick up steam in the following years (whether it's merely branded as "Web 1.1" or something other), I think there is a very real chance that it could eventually put an actual dent in what we've come to know as Web 2.0 / 3.0 / Trendy-Lazy-Web-Devs-JavaScript-Hell, in time creating its own fully-featured ecosystem where people can viably choose to both contribute to and rely on instead of the former.
Everything comes down to supply and demand.
@Dronecatcher I think we should also take into account the overall culture going on between then and now though, which I think is a major factor as to why people more or less want it to party like 1999 instead of 2019. Culturally, things have changed in a big way. Without going into detail, it goes without saying that some people aren't at all comfortable with these changes around them that others have meanwhile accepted as the bases of their entire lives.
So instead of starting a cultural movement / widespread change in perspective to shape reality back to how they wish it to look (which is a nigh impossible endeavor even for an entire group of people, and something you will also likely spend the better part of your life trying to achieve), they instead opt to simply transport themselves back to a time period where they perceived everything was more in-spec to their desires, and therein fulfill the intrinsic human need for a personalized sense of stability - without potentially disrupting everyone else around them, if that makes sense.
With that being said, I understand your point and I agree; I think the current landscape (whatever it may concern) still needs to be modified for the better, but as I see it, that's not to say we can't still go back in time however often we like to take inspiration for how the future ought to be shaped all the while.