Hi Barney,
I've got to thank you for your input. I certainly appreciate it.
Barney you said: The thing is, your rhetorical 'why not' will sound weaker
than the client's 'why'.
I must clarify that I don't need to clarify the issue to a client.
My intention of this post to begin with was not because I have to convince a
client. My reason was simply because so many like to argue that validation
is not important for any number of reasons.
For instance the reference I made to the google webmaster fuss. lol, I spent
a bit of time yesterday validating one such "fusser's" index page.....xhtml
transitional. I didn't remove the table, I didn't remove all the font tags
etc.
All I did was make the darn page valid. I don't get anything from such an
exercise except for experience and the slight hope that someone in the same
position I was at one time might gain some realization that it isn't hard,
doesn't have to change their beautiful designs.
However I didn't even show them, as they stand on their box firmly
entrenched in that it absolutely does not matter to them. My question if why
are you asking questions as to if the code matters to google.
I've also just for the heck of it because I can, validated and converted to
css sites and or pages for several folks for free. I just want to share with
them, that valid code is not impossible nor a big pain in the rear to
acheive.
If I build a site and do get paid for it, well I build valid sites. The
client doesn't care, but I do. I did build a site for pay once that didn't
and doesn't validate. Well it does except for one (1) small reason, I could
not find an valid alternative to (onresize). Other then that and of course
the additions made over time by their content input. I didn't do the data
base or php programming.
Also I could have chosen to leave out the "onresize" but it would have added
an additional click on the reload for users, I opted not to validate and
make the "onresize" automatic. The client didn't care, nor did they know.
I've had the distinct pleasure to have carte blanche.
Not to infer I am a good site builder, nor professional. Novice with good
intentions and a desire to deliver the best I can do.
Oh well,
I'm glad so many have responded to my questions. It's been interesting.
I'm also glad some appreciate my analogy, I was quite afraid it was a bit to
off to post.
I also hope my typos and mistakes in the text of my posts are not too darn
awful. I don't even see them until I read them back after posting.
Barney, one other thing............... I didn't use the word "snot". lol I
was a bit more tactful then that I hope.
Sharron
----- Original Message -----
From: "Barney Carroll" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2006 11:55 AM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Tissue (valid code) vs shirt sleeves (wysiwyg editors and
those who use them and also refuse to use tissues)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The point is there are validation tools, information and help available
for free everywhere. It doesn't mean one has to spend money to validate
their pages. If one takes the time to build a site for themselves using
whatever method, well then why not take a bit more time and use valid
code?
I am certainly not suggesting you turn away from validation on principle
(I think I gave that impression). The thing is, your rhetorical 'why not'
will sound weaker than the client's 'why'. Is that what you're going to
tell them, or is that the kind of statement you could only let go
unquestioned in a community of web developers? I'm not your client, and
you shouldn't feel the need to justify your practices to me. Them,
however...
As you put it, there is a notion of 'niceness' to validation. But as a
paying civilian, it's unlikely your client will sympathise with this.
Saying your reason for it is that they will get better search results is
an abuse of their ignorance and possibly ours (I'm not quite sure how
seriously that was taken). I think you should tell your client that
validation will...
1. Make their site accessible cross-browser, cross-language, cross-medium.
2. Be future-proof and never need integral re-designs to work across these
factors in the future.
3. Make the back end of the finished product manageable and understandable
in case they should ever hire someone else to tweak, upgrade or re-design
it in any way.
The snot on the shirt is not visible to the client, only 'our friends on
the internet' - who should not be your target audience; too many people
design for designers, and they are not the ones who need it. Design for
the client. Explain to the client how snot is unhygienic, how it will
matte the shirt, how it will make it difficult to clean.
Regards,
Barney
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.0.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.26/594 - Release Date:
12/20/2006
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
