9 replies to this topic

[Matheus]

With the new and polemic "web 2.0" style spreading the web those days, something really catched my attention: the obsession to the valid XHTML 1.0.

But, is that really nescessary? I mean, if the browsers are evoluing acording to the new kinds of HTML and CSS, why should be pull back to the 1.0 thing? Do we build new cars that can be driven by monkeys? Do we still force people to learn latin, even if is a dead leanguage?

Obiviously that making webpages using smart code to make it load faster is always a good thing, but consider an error to don't use a ALT tag on EVERY image you have on your website.... is that REALLY nescessary?

even google didn't pass on the validation test... check it by yourself: http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%...w.google.com%2F
57 errors, are them real errors or the real error is on W3C validator


Please, NO flame wars, this can be polemic but is not a reason to start a fight

[Donna]

As I wrote in another topic somewhere on here the top 100 websites on the web don't validate, doesn't stop people going to them.

Personally I don't give 2 hoots if a website is validated or not, is 500kb's to load or 10kb's it all loads and shows the same to me, like here I see members saying the page takes to long to load but yet their internet speeds are more than mine lol and the pages load fine for me.

Web 2.0 is only a phrase/buzzword all these sites adding beta on them are stupid it reminds me of sites yrs ago on geocities with "This Site Is Under Construction" lol

It's law in some places your website must validate under Disabilities Discrimination Act

[Illinifan91]

i think being xhtml valid is a good thing but not neccasary (however you spell it) it cant hurt to do it although your probly better off spending the time on adding content because that is what will make people stay at your site.

[NGPixel]

For a Web Developer, it's normally to show off that he can code properly. But I would say that using validation is more about standards, just look at HTML 4.01 pages, they are all messed and don't even even try to understand the source code.

ALT tags are useful for accessibility. Don't think it's just for fun lol

[Matheus]

yes ng, if we look at some sliced and bad coded layouts we probably won't understand the code and everything will be all messup.

but sometimes people don't add things to the website just becouse it isn't XTML valid like it werer going to ruin the website or crash it.

and donna, your right, this web 2.0 thing is something that might be just a phase (lets prey my friends hahah)

[Mr. Matt]

lets just be honest, most of the time the standards are pointless, and there is no point trying to make somthing 'valid' as with all the different browers out these days there is really no such thing as a valid site as every browser shows it different.

Well that is my opinion on it.

Matt

[Matthew.]

I validate because i like to think that i can. I dont obsess on it like a lot of people, if a site isnt valid i dont care. If it's like one large sliced up photoshop images still with

<!-- imageready slices etc -->

in then i care.

[Tirus]

validation shmalidation, i conquer with D.

[Davey]

i validated one site, all my errors were silly things like no alt tags (so i added empty ones) and no background colour given (so i used inherit) lol, but i couldn't be bothered validating again, the site loaded fine with or without the validation and as already stated, 9 times out of 10 the targeted visitors are unlikely to bother checking ur code anyway lol

[syntex]

I got 100% on my one, actually made me quite jolly to be honest
Dont see the point though!