BritCSS: Fixes CSS to use non-American English

Project intent & humour

• Many commenters treat BritCSS as a tongue‑in‑cheek “piss take” rather than a serious tool, noting that British tech culture is saturated with sarcasm that non‑Brits often miss.
• Some still bristle at the repo’s “non-bastardised” framing, seeing it as unnecessarily divisive, while others lean into the bit (“then learn tò speak proper English!”).
• Several posts explicitly say “it’s a joke” and compare it to earlier humorous projects like “Spiffing” and “British PHP”.

Language evolution, correctness, and orthography

• A long subthread argues that spelling is fundamentally a cultural artefact, not objectively “correct” or “bastardised”.
• Historical details are debated: Latin/French roots of “color/colour”, early variants like “colur/onur”, and how orthographic changes relate (or don’t) to pronunciation shifts.
• Some stress that even in more phonetic languages, spelling rules are socially chosen; others try to distinguish between a writing system’s rules and individual word histories.
• Silent letters and irregularities (e.g., “sign”, “ough”) are discussed as preserving etymological/semantic links at the expense of phonetic transparency.

American vs British English and accents

• Multiple comments claim American spelling and certain accents are historically conservative; others dispute the “better heritage” idea and note both sides have changed significantly.
• There’s back‑and‑forth on Shakespearean or “original” pronunciation and which modern dialects it most resembles.
• Many jokes play on cross‑Atlantic misunderstandings (fanny/rubber, tuna on jacket potatoes, calendars starting on Sunday) and the difficulty Americans allegedly have with British irony.

Programming, standards, and practicality

• Several commenters argue strongly that code should stick to American spellings used by languages and standards (e.g., CSS color) for consistency and interoperability.
• They criticize BritCSS as creating a “second language” layer, adding fragile tooling and client‑side preprocessing for a non‑problem.
• Others counter that local teams often use their own spelling conventions anyway, and that open source need not default to US English.
• R is cited as an example of a language that supports both spellings without causing confusion.

Non‑native and broader perspectives

• Non‑native speakers generally prefer simpler, more regular forms (often associating that with American English) and see the whole debate as largely cultural.
• Some call English orthography “atrocious” in all flavours and note that, globally, English is just one of many possible choices for code and documentation.