Markup Validation is hard - do you care?

[stickycarrots]

I've been working with a design on a project and my goal has been to pass validation with 0 errors or warnings. My Tidy HTML Validator is showing no errors, but it's taken me nearly two hours of work to get it there and I'm not even half way done with the layout.

I'm trying to make it "tableless" as well, which is a real bitch.

Anyway, do you care about validation and stuff when you consider a designer or start a new project? What are your thoughts on it?

 

[Stanley]

validation is a waste of time
some of the stuff it complains about is ridiculous and pointless

 

[stickycarrots]

I've found it to be a pretty sweet challenge so far though.

 

[GiladG]

I used to look for 0 errors, but honestly, it doesn't pay. Spend 8 hours on a site, and 2-3 more hours to validate where the first 8 makes you the same $$.

 

[lazar]

validation is a pain in the fucking ass. i was so anal before about my code being validated and not having any warnings but it was such a pain in the ass and it nitpicks at the most annoying things. i don't even bother with it anymore. if they code works correctly in IE and Firefox, then that's enough for me.

 

[joe]

I don't write invalid code, but I never validate the fucker.

 

[Stanley]

I don't write invalid code, but I never validate the fucker.

that's pretty much what I do

 

[illusion]

I look at it in IE, Firefox, Opera and Safari, if it works in all of them, I don't care. That is my validation attempt

 

[roozbeh007]

I'm using Microsoft Expression Web Designer. all the codes are W3C valid. it's the next generation FrontPage basically. if you know FrontPage, then this is the exact same interface with some new features like .NET component controls and CSS Editor etc.

 

[wickedDUDE]

i dont care what the validator says... some ppl claim that you'll rank better in search engines if it's valid.. but that is complete b.s. because only 0.0000001% of pages actually validate. what i do is just look at the page in i.e. and firefox, and providing they look exactly the same, and produce no errors from the user's standpoint, then it is a go for me.

 

[pjleonhardt]

For my Arbitrage, Affiliate stuff, I dont give a shit if it validates as long as it looks decent in IE and FF. Why would I?
When I do web design/develoment work, I'll get it to transitional, because the layouts are more complicated and the validation helps iron out some rendering bugs.

 

[claudek]

Use Templates that use properly validated code. Make your own templates that are standards compliant. Now you use and reuse these codes using Dreamweaver and the like and should be able to churn out validated sites with ease.

No excuse for poorly coded sites nowadays. With validated code and validated CSS, you'll find you can churn out websites like mad with unique/interesting layouts that are easy to change on the fly.

 

[DewChugr]

I validate mine in DW and don't poput it through w3 or anything. I think, also that many people that do validate do so when they design the site, then when they make small changes they don't bother and invalidations creep in. I don't know that it is all that important, but it isn't that hard and it prevents things like easily missed </div> tags, etc.