I know it might be a stupid question, but I'm still new to Web Design.
What is the reason for stating on your website that it is valid xHTML and CSS?
Valid xHTML and CSS?
Started by ::WebCreate::, Sep 05 2007 06:37 AM
6 replies to this topic
#1
Posted 05 September 2007 - 06:37 AM
#2
Posted 05 September 2007 - 06:43 AM
uh for the obvious reasons of having a clean sheet on your hands lol uh my opinion but also so that when you do get the valid check by like w3c and clients or anybody sees that its sorta of reassuring makes it look like you know what your doing, well thats what i think anyway.
#3
Posted 05 September 2007 - 07:04 AM
The point of stating it on YOUR website would be to show people you can do it. Really, when I see those on the bottom of a website I'll usually check out their URL through the w3c validator to see if it real is valid XHTML/CSS.
So maybe putting it on your website is to say I can do it, and if you don't believe me check out this site?
So maybe putting it on your website is to say I can do it, and if you don't believe me check out this site?
#4
Posted 06 September 2007 - 12:08 AM
There is no reason.
Validating your source at the W3C is a fairly debated topic amoungst developers. There are ups and downs:
Ups:
Personal gratification.
Added credability to your business (should you run/work for one).
Potentially (although the opposite of guaranteed) increased compatability across browsers.
Downs:
Takes time.
Most clients don't even know what the W3C even is, let alone the definition of valid.
Really doesn't do anything for compatability. In fact, 90% of the time, you can't have a XBC site that validates without figuring out how to work a browser detection script (which 99% of them can be fooled).
Validating your source at the W3C is a fairly debated topic amoungst developers. There are ups and downs:
Ups:
Personal gratification.
Added credability to your business (should you run/work for one).
Potentially (although the opposite of guaranteed) increased compatability across browsers.
Downs:
Takes time.
Most clients don't even know what the W3C even is, let alone the definition of valid.
Really doesn't do anything for compatability. In fact, 90% of the time, you can't have a XBC site that validates without figuring out how to work a browser detection script (which 99% of them can be fooled).
#5
Posted 06 September 2007 - 10:50 PM
Plus if you add any php or just special case thing that makes it not validate, your site looks like crap when people like archangle do try and validate because it makes you look like a lyer. For me I say I can code in xhtml and css strict valid, but I don't announce it to the world because off how bad it would make you look to a potential client who does know what it means. Acually I really have no idea if php affects it.......... (I just realized that it might just be direct input that takes into acount the php) SO NEVERMIND......... If PHP doesn't affect it then its a great thing.
#6
Posted 08 September 2007 - 12:39 PM
PHP only affects it if you write poor HTML. Essentially, the W3C has no way of knowing whether or not you use PHP.
Check my site for instance (link). The HTML validates, and if you even look at the source you couldn't tell PHP was involved. I also only have 1 CSS error, an IE hack i had to do.
In short, i can write valid code and have no problem announcing it to the world because of how much it doesn't matter. I also inform the client that there is a potential for things (specifically css) to not validate due to XBC problems.
Now, don't go making accusations. If you want to start a flame war, you're welcome to go elsewhere.
Check my site for instance (link). The HTML validates, and if you even look at the source you couldn't tell PHP was involved. I also only have 1 CSS error, an IE hack i had to do.
In short, i can write valid code and have no problem announcing it to the world because of how much it doesn't matter. I also inform the client that there is a potential for things (specifically css) to not validate due to XBC problems.
Now, don't go making accusations. If you want to start a flame war, you're welcome to go elsewhere.
Edited by rc69, 08 September 2007 - 12:45 PM.
#7
Posted 08 September 2007 - 04:40 PM
I wans't starting a flam war or making acuzations. ? All i was doing was say what I thought I new but it was obvously wrong... No flame wars going on hear though.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
