11 replies to this topic

[Matheus]

Something I find very funny at webdesign, is that MANY websites show that it has valid XHTML and CSS, but sometimes the owners place the vlaid mark at the website even if it doesn't validates!

and what is EVEN MORE funny, it's the case of http://w3csites.com/ , an online showcase of websites that have valid XHTML/ CSS designs, but THEIR website is not ( http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%...w3csites.com%2F )

this confirms the theory that many people just validate their coding to gain "status" with the webdesigners community on the web. very sad

[Bug]

Lol... well, I don't see anywhere it saying that their own site is valid, but I thought that would have been expected

[α∂αмяoss]

Lol, they just got pwned.

[Hayden]

depends on what's going on with the site too.

I use WordPress and by default without adding posts, it validates W3C standards but I made a few simple posts and now it has errors in it when I check it.

[Matheus]

yea, a few errors isn't that bad. But it's strange to see a website that loves the valid when they aren't

[Hayden]

Quote

Result: Failed validation, 14 errors

Not quite sure, I haven't bothered really reading them, it could be the theme i changed too as well.

[syntex]

Too true, all i know is im valid and its real good.

[Mr. Matt]

Getting your site to be valid xhtml and css has been hyped up way too much. The real skill for a coder is not making it valid, but making it cross browser compliant, with these days when you have so many browsers that have their own standards and way of doing things, is not easy at all..

And putting the valid sign on there when a page might not be is just asking for the little twats to start complaining at you saying the site isn't valid html.

[N4Z.]

Many sites do this I have noticed.

But erm..

P2L xHTML: http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%...xel2life.com%2F

But i must say, everything else is fine and it doesn't effect me when browsing P2L

[Donna]

Mr. Matt, on Apr 13 2007, 11:47 PM, said:

And putting the valid sign on there when a page might not be is just asking for the little twats to start complaining at you saying the site isn't valid html.

Exactly, and those that spend time checking to see if someones site is valid or not need to spend their time doing something else majority of the web isn't valid and the average web viewer doesn't care if a sites valid or not, they'll still shop on ebay or amazon or go to youtube or where ever. Content attracts people to websites not a site that's valid, too much hype over nothing.

[Matheus]

Quote

The real skill for a coder is not making it valid, but making it cross browser compliant

that's the magical words

[albinoAZN]

Mr. Matt, on Apr 14 2007, 01:47 AM, said:

The real skill for a coder is not making it valid, but making it cross browser compliant, with these days when you have so many browsers that have their own standards and way of doing things, is not easy at all..

I couldn't agree more. That's the most nerve-racking part.

S0ULJA., on Apr 14 2007, 03:10 AM, said:

P2L xHTML: http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%...xel2life.com%2F

Did you read the errors? the only thing is that he used <br> instead of the new <br />