Forum Home
PC World Chat
 
Thread ID: 67955 2006-04-11 14:00:00 Building a site that validates with W3C stu161204 (123) PC World Chat
Post ID Timestamp Content User
445756 2006-04-11 14:00:00 Hello All :)

Please Don’t Flame me on this question, this is one area I don’t know much about ( & I don’t really see the point in)

Before I got to my questions here some background:

This week I got a job from my boss to redesign his website, another guy did the design of the site & now the boss wants me to use this design on his website.

This new site is completely made out of <div> tags (which I am not a big fan off!, tables make life a LOT easier!, but we wont go there) & the old one is build with tables.

The other thing is he wants his site to validate with w3c - http://validator.w3.org/

Here is the question:

What’s the point in building a site that validates with w3c???

When the site all ready looks fine in all most all browsers & OS’s

Plus I make sure I take in to count the disabled people who could be using the sites I build (50 – 80% of the time)

The only real points I can see why the need to build a site that validates with w3c are:

1. Cleaner code (How clean can you get???), I am using Macromedia Dreamweaver MX to do my websites & it does some clean code, compared to Microsoft FrontPage

& that’s it.

If any one can give me any insight in to this subject, I would love to her it :), Please Don’t Flame me on this question, treat me as a newbe in this subject, please? & Thank you. 		stu161204 (123)
445757 2006-04-11 14:12:00 Validating your site with the guys who set the standards(W3C) is a good idea, it is one of my main checking tools.

It makes you practice correct coding that will/should work/display correctly in all browsers.

Layout with div tags is not as hard as you think, although Dreamweaver's preview dosent help much. Tables should be left for formating text/numbers not the whole page.

There is plenty of info on the W3C site, well worth studing.

To practice you should find a template constructed using div tags, work through the code, you will soon pick it up. 		Rob99 (151)
445758 2006-04-11 20:20:00 giz a link to your site... netchicken (4843)
445759 2006-04-11 21:44:00 The way I look at it Stu, is that Web Designers have never had any "rules" to follow... w3c are there to provide these "rules".

Using compliant CSS/XHTML code means your sites are clean and in most cases render faster than a document full of tables.

CSS definately makes changing a design easier - say the client decides they want the navigation on the left, instead of the right. If you design using tables it'd mean moving the table code in each individual html page, CSS means all you'd need to do is change the external CSS document, and not touch any of the html!!

There are various documents around on the web about why you should move to designing with web standards. I'd check them out :) 		Mary (6534)
445760 2006-04-11 21:49:00 What’s the point in building a site that validates with w3c???

It means you know the HTML/XHTML code is actually correct (ina grammar sense) .


When the site all ready looks fine in all most all browsers & OS’s

read this ( . w3 . org/docs/why . html" target="_blank">validator . w3 . org)


Plus I make sure I take in to count the disabled people who could be using the sites I build (50 – 80% of the time)

Well good for you, but validation doesn't have much to do with that, although it is a start .


The only real points I can see why the need to build a site that validates with w3c are:

1 . Cleaner code (How clean can you get???), I am using Macromedia Dreamweaver MX to do my websites & it does some clean code, compared to Microsoft FrontPage

& that’s it .

If any one can give me any insight in to this subject, I would love to her it :), Please Don’t Flame me on this question, treat me as a newbe in this subject, please? & Thank you .

Cleaner code also involves CSS too . Dreamweaver MX can do some terrible things to code . I actually still use it but pretty much in source code view only these days . Frontpage - no comment :rolleyes:

Have a read of position is everything (http://www . positioniseverything . net/) about using CSS for layout (but yep it breaks validation) . 		gibler (49)
445761 2006-04-11 22:29:00 What’s the point in building a site that validates with w3c???

When the site all ready looks fine in all most all browsers & OS’sWell that's always been my point too . It's a bit like shoeing horses for a run on the beach . 		Greg (193)
445762 2006-04-11 22:29:00 I think at a practical level how scrupulously clean your code is may not make a blind bit of difference to user experiences and search engine ranking . I have pages I made years ago with point n click frontpage that are frankly a mess, but still indexed in google and getting hit .

Sure I like to strip it back as far as possible, but look at the crappy sites that DO rnak well .

That saying Frontpagisms are appaling sometimes, especially if made with the earlier versions .

My sites don't often validate 100% with W3 but to demand that it does is a nerd thing . Like the guuys who build models out of matchsticks . Doesn't bother me too much if there are some issues, afterall as long as Google, Opera, IE, Firefox, read it OK, thats 90% of your work done .

Although i do desire to have clean fast loading sites and work for that end . (its like cleaning the kitchen and getting every last mark off the bench), I suspect that your boss is more trying to make sure that your own work is at a high level rather practical considerations . 		netchicken (4843)
445763 2006-04-12 11:24:00 I find things easier, and require less code using div tags / css. I can't stand tables for layouts...

Always have a Doctype. I recommend HTML 4.01 Strict.

"Plus I make sure I take in to count the disabled people who could be using the sites I build (50 – 80% of the time) "

Not so. If you are using tables for layouts, then a screen reader gets very confused from what I understand.

The only thing I find that is harder to do with div/css is having columns with equal lengths. That was easy with tables, but not the same with div/css (not exactly hard, just not as easy as with tables)

HTML should only be used for content. All the design side of a website should be in the css. Never use the <font> tag. It makes it a heck of a lot easier to manage a website, and make small sitewise changes to your design.

Tables are fine for tabular data, which they where created for.

"My sites don't often validate 100% with W3 but to demand that it does is a nerd thing"
I demand it!!

I have also heard that table designs screw up on things like PDA's.

I have dreamweaver mx, but when I use it, I only use the wysiwyg mode for data entry.

I think it is best to make your initial template 'purely' in code view, so you have full control over it.

After that, wysiwyg away and put the content in. 		mejobloggs (264)
445764 2006-04-12 22:01:00 possibly with the exception of the latest wep page makers most wysiwyg editors do slopy code.

frankly one of the biggest reasons for valitating the code is so people learn to use the proper codes, not just "click this button here". most browsers will display pages fine even if they are wrong.

using a set standard gets away from certain compainies making browser specific coding, browser wars and webdesgners having to make different pages for different browsers.

also if your a client and you want someone else to continue/expand your web sites its a whole lot easier if its done properly, its easier and cheaper if the basic's are all done correctly from day one. 		tweak'e (69)
445765 2006-04-13 01:13:00 giz a link to your site...

I would, but it will count as Spam ;) 		stu161204 (123)
1 2 3