View Single Post
02-08-2005, 01:15 AM
#8
ULTiMATE is offline ULTiMATE
Status: Member
Join date: Aug 2004
Location: Bristol, United Kingdom
Expertise:
Software:
 
Posts: 241
iTrader: 0 / 0%
 

ULTiMATE is on a distinguished road

Send a message via ICQ to ULTiMATE Send a message via AIM to ULTiMATE Send a message via MSN to ULTiMATE

  Old

Originally Posted by derek.l
. . .

this has nothing to do with standards comlient coding methods, it's a way yo test the functioning of your code. image rady can code to valid xhtml standards.. that doesn't make it ayn good. this resource is to get a visual of its performance. it can be unvalid and still work correcty and vice versa.
I know what you're saying, but you can't honestly say this isn't going to turn into one of those things where people are going to say "Yes! Now the 0.00006% of people using [insert crap browser] can view my page!".

Originally Posted by derek.l
the w3 validator is just a penis enlarger coders like to use ( i do it all the time ), but i don't blame them, if you're going to do something, do it right. this however is a completely seperate issue from the topic at hand.

if it doesn't work, no one can buy the product thus no profit is had. that means NO MONEY.. you should be able to do the math here.
I think they're related, because it's this reason which leads to standards-whorism. Who honestly cares if someone can view your web page in the earliest form of Netscape possible? Take note that many people who code for large websites don't actually cover all browsers known to man, and don't validate code just for the hell of it. Look at Google for example, their code isn't valid by any means, but it's viewable by everyone, and if not (in most cases, i dunno about Google) if the user is using a crap browser, they will be directed to an update of their browser or will be allowed to see a "lite-version" of the users webpage, therefore job done. Personally, if people can view my page in Firefox, IE and Opera, then I'm sorted.

I realise that it's kinda off-topic, but as I said before, it'd make less sense to make a large thread on such a trivial subject, unless it actually starts to get bigger, then the Admins/Mods could just split this thread up and stick the other posts in a new thread, or something.


Originally Posted by Dave
People want their web page to look good in every browser and every resolution so that EVERYONE can enjoy the site. Not just people with 1024x768 who use IE, but EVERYONE.

THAT is why people try to code to standard, THAT is why people check in other browsers to get it perfect, and frankly, I find the attitude you seem to have plain daft.

People don't go for standards just so they can shove a tiny button on their page and have a huge smile while going around saying 'my page is valid', they do it to make sure it works in every browser, for everyone.

GOOD coders and GOOD designers make their sites for everyone, not just the people who use a certain browser at a certain resolution.
Perhaps some people want that, but it's fairly obvious that no business is going to turn around and say "Oh yeah?! Well our web page can be viewed in Lynx! We're sure to beat our competitors now!". Remember why a lot of people use the internet, as a new medium of promoting and running their business. What matters most to these people? Money. Pure, hard cash.

Onto the standards make pages work comment. Have you ever coded a website, checked that it's completely valid, then looked at the actual web page, and seen that it looks nothing like it should, and layers are all over the place. There's no need for a question mark because I know you have. Standards do NOT make web pages work. It's like writing a report for school. You can use proper grammar (standards compliancy) as much as you can, but if your report is crap to start off with, how much is it going to help? Whereas if you write a great report, and make just a few grammatical errors, it's not going to be played down. Standards coding is essential, but not if you take it to an unhealthy level.

Also yes, good designers/developers create their sites for everyone, but that doesn't mean that Cleatus McGee should be able to view your shopping basket script properly with Mac-IE if it's going to cut out some of the best DHTML features you've added into your script. If someone has a poor browser, then direct them to an update, or just simply a better browser, whilst still letting them view your site.

Also, sadly enough, people DO go for standards just so they can stick a fancy button on their page.