Could not agree more! End of the day validating a site is the least of you worries, unless that is what the client overall wants.
To be honests i wouldnt even charge extra for a valid site, as in my eyes any true web developer should make sure it validates anyway, as it shows they know what there doing. I've currently taken on a great contract job with a uk council, and due to them requiring great w3c skills and bobby compatibility my skills in standards and css has got me a great job at nearly triple my normal rate! On Tue, 1 Jun 2004 19:19 , Mark Stanton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> sent: >Hey Jackie > >I agree with you and think maybe I just didn't explain myself properly. > >A guy in high school who has made a site for his uncle and one for his >soccer team is not going to be able to charge the same rate as someone >who has been developing site professionally for a number of years. > >I completely agree with that point: rate should be based on "quality >of workmanship". This covers any service industry; architects, >doctors, tilers, masseurs and web developers. > >But a developer's rate should be based on a broad range of factors, >from the ability to guide the client through the process of designing >a solution that fits their requirements through to the ability to >implement the design effectively using whatever technologies are >suitable. Web standards are a small but significant aspect of this and >web standards are not always the right fit for every client. > >The idea that you can charge more for a site because it validates is >missing the point entirely. Your site might be better than the one >created by "export to web" from photoshop, but standards probably have >very little to do with this difference. > >I'm sitting here now after work has officially finished and I'll be >here for a while yet. Its not an exceptional day, I spend a lot of >time outside of work hours learning. Tonight I might learn something >that I don't know now and I might end up using that in a site I build >tomorrow, but should I charge more for it? No way. The site might be >of a slightly higher quality and all of these incremental changes in >quality may add up to more happy clients and better sites in a >portfolio. One day this might all add up to the point where I (or my >accountant) realise that I can safely increase my rate. Or it might >result in me winning a job because of my "standards" experience that I >wouldn't have otherwise got. There's my reward. > >But until then I'll keep it where it is and keep learning how to build >better sites. > >Knowledge of standards is very important but if you go to Bob's Pizza >shop and think you can explain why you are 20% more expensive than >that guy down the street by telling him the site you make will >validate you're in for a rude surprise. > > >Cheers > >Mark >The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ >See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm >for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > ***************************************************** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *****************************************************
