On 12/20/06, Andrew Ingram [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2. Tell them that validating code will get higher search rankings, it
doesn't matter if it's true or not
Until you tell that to someone that knows what they're talking about, and
then you look like an idiot. Valid code means the browser has
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1. On a scale of 1-10, how important is W3C validation?
XHTML: 10+ (regardless of MIME type)
HTML: 8 (but it depends on what lowers its importance from a 10)
CSS: 10 (until IE/win needs its fixes, and weak standard-support must be
solved by non-standard workarounds)
On 12/20/06 5:04 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I've decided that telling people it is important is like telling my 5 year old
granddaughter that a tissue is better then her shirt sleeves.
Yes the honey, the shirt is convenient, it works and you don't have to go
about
Matthew Pennell wrote:
Until you tell that to someone that knows what they're talking about,
and then you look like an idiot. Valid code means the browser has to
spend less time figuring out what you meant to write, the page is is
more likely to look the same across browsers and platforms, and
The search engine thing is pretty much a lie.
People are begging Google to factor w3c validity into the relevance of
their results, but there's no good reason they should - and I personally
believe this is a bit sinister.
Invalid code should succeed or fail on its own merits, not because
I do my best to adhere to standards simply because I can.
Sharron
- Original Message -
From: Barney Carroll [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2006 9:33 AM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Tissue (valid code) vs shirt sleeves (wysiwyg editors and
those
Wow, that's kinda harsh - and at Christmas!!
I think you've got it backwards. Those of us who aspire to live in a
standards-based www are not fascists trying to impose some arbitrary
and unreasonable set of conditions. We just want our stuff to just
work. Our fight is not with users or
I think you're missing the point of what i'm saying. Good semantic
markup has more meaning, that's what semantics are all about. However,
an algorithm can only begin to assess the true meaning if the syntax is
correct (humans don't always have to do this, because humans are
smart). Good
You don't charge more for compliant code, because you're never going to
say oh, i'll do it using tables and rubbish things but charge you half
as much then, but you'll probably be charging more because you actually
know what you're doing - like you say, you're not a hack. The main
reason is
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?
Andrew Maben wrote:
Wow, that's kinda harsh - and at Christmas!!
Sorry Andrew, I always come out wrong with these things. It's a warning
as opposed to a criticism. I'm only on this list because I think
standardisation is an integrally good idea, especially when it serves
purposes.
(Who
[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
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
opps decided that I may be applying the responses to this thread personally. I
do realize that the answers do apply to all, especially those who do have a
need to convince clients.
My stance was leaning more toward the general website building population. Mom
and pops who want and do build
hmmm, sorry if off topic and uncouth. I've a rather simple question or two
if you please.
1. On a scale of 1-10, how important is W3C validation?
2. How does one convince folks that it is important?
3. Is valid code important to SE?
4. Does it follow, that those who don't care about
Interesting way of putting it :)
My answers:
1. 7, you should do everything within reason to make sure your code
validates but sometimes it's just not possible and you shouldn't get too
stressed about it.
2. Tell them that validating code will get higher search rankings, it
doesn't matter if
16 matches
Mail list logo
