Today's Posts Follow Us On Twitter! TFL Members on Twitter  
Forum search: Advanced Search  
Navigation
Marketplace
  Members Login:
Lost password?
  Forum Statistics:
Forum Members: 24,254
Total Threads: 80,792
Total Posts: 566,471
There are 993 users currently browsing (tf).
 
  Our Partners:
 
  TalkFreelance     Design and Development     HTML/XHTML/DHTML/CSS :

Standards & Validity

Thread title: Standards & Validity
Closed Thread  
Page 3 of 3 < 1 2 3
    Thread tools Search this thread Display Modes  
04-28-2005, 11:42 PM
#21
adrenalinepcs is offline adrenalinepcs
Status: Junior Member
Join date: Apr 2005
Location:
Expertise:
Software:
 
Posts: 36
iTrader: 0 / 0%
 

adrenalinepcs is on a distinguished road

  Old

i always validated my code on bigger sites. if someone if paying me $20 for something i don't waste my time.

04-29-2005, 12:36 AM
#22
derek lapp is offline derek lapp
Status: design rockstar
Join date: Jan 2005
Location: guelph, ontario
Expertise:
Software:
 
Posts: 2,246
iTrader: 0 / 0%
 

derek lapp is on a distinguished road

  Old

i stand by my remark that validation is overrated.

04-29-2005, 06:32 AM
#23
Julian is offline Julian
Status: Simply to simplify
Join date: Apr 2005
Location: Foxton, Manawatu, New Zealand
Expertise:
Software:
 
Posts: 5,572
iTrader: 0 / 0%
 

Julian is on a distinguished road

  Old

iFex, I stand by my comments too. I believe that you are correct in some areas but to rubbish validation is wrong.

Have an open mind iFex, it would elevate you higher in the respect standings.

If this post is offensive, mods, then please remove it.

04-29-2005, 06:42 AM
#24
derek lapp is offline derek lapp
Status: design rockstar
Join date: Jan 2005
Location: guelph, ontario
Expertise:
Software:
 
Posts: 2,246
iTrader: 0 / 0%
 

derek lapp is on a distinguished road

  Old

i wasn't sugesting anyone was wrong.. i'll have to revive the cyclopse smiley to show a posative tone i guess. i'm getting too many negative replies. +)

i'm all for validation, but i look @ it from the mostly logical point of view that 'if it's wrong, it's wrong' so validate it! people generally try to spell correctly when they write, so writing proper code follows the same logic. i simply think people take the fact that some validates way too seriously. . . these people are also very new to the css/xhtml optimization area, so i can't totally blame them.

on the other hand, i think it's lame from a business perspective to have links saying "valid xhtml!" - personal sites i look the other way because it can reflect the person - but from a business perspective, only other people in the field will have any idea what it means or any interest.

EDIT:
my friend's website here illustrates what i mean. - he's not a designer but a programmer, so his clients are people who cant excellent coding, so they'll have some knowledge of that that means, but i see the same link set ups on websites that really aren't very optimized, but simply follow proper syntax.

having spent the time to really understand how i can optimize my code best and stil be able to deliver a fairly strong visual appearence, it annoys me sometimes. +(

04-29-2005, 07:16 AM
#25
Julian is offline Julian
Status: Simply to simplify
Join date: Apr 2005
Location: Foxton, Manawatu, New Zealand
Expertise:
Software:
 
Posts: 5,572
iTrader: 0 / 0%
 

Julian is on a distinguished road

  Old

iFex, I gotta agree with you on the "having valid xhtml links on your site" comments

Originally Posted by iFex
having spent the time to really understand how i can optimize my code best and stil be able to deliver a fairly strong visual appearence, it annoys me sometimes. +(
I don't understand that comment? Do you have trouble optimizing your code to validate? Or do you have trouble finding the time to do it? Or do you think that optimizing code to validate ruins your visual appearances? Or do I have this all wrong?

04-29-2005, 09:50 AM
#26
Koobi is offline Koobi
Koobi's Avatar
Status: Member
Join date: Apr 2005
Location:
Expertise:
Software:
 
Posts: 312
iTrader: 0 / 0%
 

Koobi is on a distinguished road

  Old

If it's a business site, I think they should have a link that implies, in some way, that the site can be browsed with hand-held devices since a lot of business oriented people use handlheld devices nowadays. This would be more beneficial than saying the site is XHTML valid for a business site since it's unlikely that a business oriented person could link the two (i.e. that XHTML valid sites are also easily browsable with hand held devices)

04-29-2005, 01:36 PM
#27
derek lapp is offline derek lapp
Status: design rockstar
Join date: Jan 2005
Location: guelph, ontario
Expertise:
Software:
 
Posts: 2,246
iTrader: 0 / 0%
 

derek lapp is on a distinguished road

  Old

Originally Posted by Julian
I don't understand that comment? Do you have trouble optimizing your code to validate? Or do you have trouble finding the time to do it? Or do you think that optimizing code to validate ruins your visual appearances? Or do I have this all wrong?
heh, no that's not what i meant. i started cracking away w/ xhtml/css and tabless coding in probably around spring 2003. i'm confortable in the realm of tableless/optimized coding.

people who have no idea about really optimizing/coding see those sites w/ the xhtml links and if i ever talk with them, sometimes i get asked things like "how come there's no link on your website? are not any good at it?" and i just go blank.

it's annoying sometimes because really optimized coding is underrated in what it can do, but having a validation link -- which says nothing about the code's performance -- is so overvalued.

04-30-2005, 06:13 AM
#28
Julian is offline Julian
Status: Simply to simplify
Join date: Apr 2005
Location: Foxton, Manawatu, New Zealand
Expertise:
Software:
 
Posts: 5,572
iTrader: 0 / 0%
 

Julian is on a distinguished road

  Old

Originally Posted by iFex
people who have no idea about really optimizing/coding see those sites w/ the xhtml links and if i ever talk with them, sometimes i get asked things like "how come there's no link on your website? are not any good at it?" and i just go blank.
lol, that's funny!

I have no links to anything about validation in my site either, I don't see the point of confusing clients any more than they probably are just trying to find a good designer.

Although everything I do is valid coding

04-30-2005, 12:19 PM
#29
Adam is offline Adam
Adam's Avatar
Status: Member
Join date: Jan 2005
Location:
Expertise:
Software:
 
Posts: 433
iTrader: 0 / 0%
 

Adam is on a distinguished road

  Old

6 months ago i used to just put code together, very much cowboy code but then i picked up a copy of "designing with standards" by zeldman. i havent read it all but that kind of changed it all for me and now ive got rid of dreamweaver and just use notepad. and i find it alot easier.

05-02-2005, 07:25 PM
#30
Yuneek is offline Yuneek
Status: I'm new around here
Join date: May 2005
Location: Florida
Expertise:
Software:
 
Posts: 17
iTrader: 0 / 0%
 

Yuneek is on a distinguished road

  Old

Originally Posted by Anthony
Ok, so we all code standards-compliant and valid code, but who actually takes the time to code within these guidelines?

I try to code valid web pages using XHTML (tables) and CSS 2.0 syntax, or if requested by the customer, HTML 4.1 Transitional (rather than XHTML).

I'm just curious to know who honestly believes in web standards, and practises these ways when coding.
I believe in web standards fully, I find them to be highly underestimated and more important than many believe. I would like to see as many webmasters use them as possible. I code all of my sites in XHTML Strict without tables and use CSS for all presentation.

Regards,
Yuneek

Closed Thread  
Page 3 of 3 < 1 2 3


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

  Posting Rules  
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump:
 
  Contains New Posts Forum Contains New Posts   Contains No New Posts Forum Contains No New Posts   A Closed Forum Forum is Closed