Validators Are the Stupiedest Ideas

Status
Not open for further replies.
imagenesis

imagenesis

sup
Jul 5, 2006
312
1
0
Seriously, unless you're site caters to web design developement professionals validtors are completely useless. They never validate my sites for the stupidest and most miniscule reasons, yet all of my sites look great in all browsers. Discuss.

As a designer and as a developer, I'm not going to waste my valuable time trying to validate to some stupid completely non standard (IMO) tool.
 


imagenesis said:
Seriously, unless you're site caters to web design developement professionals validtors are completely useless. They never validate my sites for the stupidest and most miniscule reasons, yet all of my sites look great in all browsers. Discuss.
Click to expand...
Your sites will have issues in other ways, if they don't meet validation. In example, accessibility, crawlability, compatability with browsers that you don't use (including forward-compatability--Netscape 1.1 had quirks that webmasters relied on and in Netscape 2 the page didn't even DISPLAY), etc. Sometimes the same browser will even display a different thing upon each page load of a non-standards-compliant page.

They're also great for debugging.
 
I wouldn't worry about it. Look at some of the webs largest websites.. ebay, yahoo, google.. even web 2.0 sites like digg.com and flickr.com; none of them validate. Validation is really only for the :bowdown: css/xhtml zealot honkys.

-Dan
 
il put it this way: when i go to a website, wether i stay and then return later or not is not determined by wether the webmaster forgot to close his table tag.
 
g1c9 said:
il put it this way: when i go to a website, wether i stay and then return later or not is not determined by wether the webmaster forgot to close his table tag.
Click to expand...

But if there is something in the code that the webmaster screwed up on that effects the way you view the page it will effect whether you return later or not.
 
weneedsound said:
I wouldn't worry about it. Look at some of the webs largest websites.. ebay, yahoo, google.. even web 2.0 sites like digg.com and flickr.com; none of them validate. Validation is really only for the :bowdown: css/xhtml zealot honkys.

-Dan
Click to expand...


I'd be one of those "css/xhtml zealot honkys" then. :crying:

But I do find, when I write valid code, it renders fine in all browsers. If I write invalid code, it'll fuck up. >_<

Maybe I'm just a bad coder though. :eek7:
 
Indy said:
I'd be one of those "css/xhtml zealot honkys" then. :crying:

But I do find, when I write valid code, it renders fine in all browsers. If I write invalid code, it'll fuck up. >_<
Click to expand...

Here, here! Add me to the list of "css/xhtml zealot honkys". :321:

If you're going to do it, do it right. Validation is not that difficult, it just takes a little more time. Unfortunately, the vast majority of people are just plain lazy. :2twocents:
 
SEO_Mike said:
If you're going to do it, do it right. Validation is not that difficult, it just takes a little more time. Unfortunately, the vast majority of people are just plain lazy.
Click to expand...

No its not very difficult; agreed. But as the old saying goes.. time = money.. And a valid xhtml/css page does not increase your profit (unless you run cssreboot/beauty or any of the other candy-css honky niche market websites ((suckers)) ). Validation serves for nothing more than stroking your own ego and Lets face it.. most of the market is not going to care about your validation badge that your website is sporting.

(*Snicker*I am only playing devils advocate as most of my web pages are compliant.. hah)
 
I'll throw my hat into the 'css/xhtml zealot honkys' ring, as well. I design, mainly, for paying clients - most of whom expect a validated site.

However - about 2 minutes (give or take) after I've launched their site and leave it in their capable hands... validation breaks the first time they use target="blank" - - but, at least I delivered a valid product, eh?

I used to think validation was for the 'code purists' in the crowd - - but more and more I found that trying to adhere to web standards using validation taught me more about coding than any book I could ever read on the topic.

:2twocents:
 
EWebscapes said:
I'll throw my hat into the 'css/xhtml zealot honkys' ring, as well. I design, mainly, for paying clients - most of whom expect a validated site.

However - about 2 minutes (give or take) after I've launched their site and leave it in their capable hands... validation breaks the first time they use target="blank" - - but, at least I delivered a valid product, eh?

I used to think validation was for the 'code purists' in the crowd - - but more and more I found that trying to adhere to web standards using validation taught me more about coding than any book I could ever read on the topic.

:2twocents:
Click to expand...

No doubt; Same thing has happenes to me.. Normally i use the xhtml/css web2.0 bit as a buzzword to get the job. But.. ah well. If they only knew that xhtml isn't even supported in IE.. haha. But I guess most webdesigners don't even know that.

(for those who don't know; when you serve xhtml you have to serve it as content type text/html.. otherwise IE users will be prompted to download the file instead of view it. When served as text/html.. IE then parses it as html which in turn you lose any extra benefit of xml..:updown:)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back