473,895 Members | 2,120 Online
Bytes | Software Development & Data Engineering Community
+ Post

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

Opinion: Do web standards matter?

Just out of curiosity, while checking on a site I was working on, I
decided to throw a couple of the web's most popular URLs into the W3C
Markup Validator.

Out of microsoft.com, google.com, amazon.com, yahoo.com, aol.com, and
mozilla.org, only Mozilla's site came back "Valid HTML".

So if all these places, with their teams of web developers don't seem to
care, should the rest of us small time web devs concern ourselves with
standards? I do, but sometimes I feel it's a wasted effort. What do yinz
think?

P.S. Slashdot returned a 403 Forbidden to the validator but when I saved
the homepage locally, it failed too.
--
[ Sugapablo ]
[ http://www.sugapablo.net <--personal | http://www.sugapablo.com <--music ]
[ http://www.2ra.org <--political | http://www.subuse.net <--discuss ]

http://www.subuse.net : text-only, low bandwidth, anonymous web forums
Jul 23 '05
250 10584

"Greg Schmidt" <gr***@trawna.c om> wrote in message
news:1b******** ********@trawna .com...
On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 09:53:48 -0600, me wrote:
"kchayka" <us****@c-net.us> wrote in message
news:3a******** *****@individua l.net...
me wrote:

Philosophically speaking I oppose anything that impedes a website author's
freedom of expression. If authors cannot expresses themselves freely

then
the web serves no purpose.


The web is (primarily) a visual medium. There is nothing that you can
express visually that cannot be done in such a way that it validates.


<snip>
Millions upon millions of web sites have come and gone. Many of them
failed because they didn't reach their intended audience. Of course,
the site must be there before visitors will show up, but if the visitors
don't materialize, then the site will wither and die. Looked at another
way, without visitors, it's not a web site, it's your own private
writings, which may as well be in a journal under your pillow.

--
Greg Schmidt gr***@trawna.co m
Trawna Publications http://www.trawna.com/


And millions are continually coming online; most being built by the average
Joe who wants to share family photos or express an opinion or seek others
with similar interests in their hobby.

When I have time, I will return to the sites I built 5 years ago for $200.00
each to support my family, meanwhile I hope the ability to view sites does
not become contingent upon validation.

I'll try to think of analogies in other media & art forms whereby standards
(not related to health & safety) are required to be met, before
publication/viewing by others. That may aid in understanding both sides.

I agree that accessibility is very important.

Carla
Jul 24 '05 #51
me
"Joel Shepherd" <jo******@ix.ne tcom.com> wrote in message
news:jo******** *************** *****@news1.wes t.earthlink.net ...
In article <11************ *@corp.supernew s.com>, "me" <anonymous@_.co m>
wrote:

[snip]

Wow. A seven-sentence response, two-thirds of which started with "I",
and six of which featured "I" as the primary subject. It really *must*
be all about you.
You are a keen observer, thank you for tallying the number of sentences I
used to express myself. The OP asked for opinions about how I as a website
designer felt about standards, as your astute observations have revealed I
have given my opinions as they applied to my situation so yes in a sense you
are correct, on this one occasion, in this thread and under these specfic
circumstances.
If authors cannot expresses themselves freely then
the web serves no purpose.


Folks who can't express themselves freely on the Web probably face
_much_ bigger challenges than the meanies at the W3C. Poverty,
illiteracy and tyranny suppress far more expression than some W3C
committee suggesting that tables not be used for layout, or declining to
include BLINK in some standard.


The implications of my words are evidently non-obvious to you, I will
restate them for your benefit in terms I hope you can understand. Standards
are OK as long as they don't cause sites to become unusable. Please let me
know if you're still fuzzy on my meaning.
Get some perspective before spouting off BS about freedom of expression.


I'm sorry if my method of expression offended you but your approval is of no
consequence. If you found my post so lacking in perspective perhaps you
would honor us with your learned opinion, hopefully you have the capacity to
express yourself in a manner that is something other than just insults. Have
a nice day.
Signed,
me
Jul 24 '05 #52
c.thornquist wrote:
I'll try to think of analogies in other media & art forms whereby
standards (not related to health & safety) are required to be met,
before publication/viewing by others.


Publishing houses generally insist that standards of grammar and spelling
are followed by their authors.

Most newspapers and magazines, as well as insisting on correct grammar and
spelling, have a house style. For example, the Guardian makes its style
guide available online <http://www.guardian.co .uk/styleguide/>.

(Aside: As an experienced journalist of 50 years' standing once said:
"There are only three words which need a capital letter: God, The Queen,
and the Editor." He was exaggerating, but you get the picture.)

--
Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
Contact Me ~ http://tobyinkster.co.uk/contact

Jul 24 '05 #53
me
"Arne" <us**@domain.in valid> wrote in message
news:3a******** *****@individua l.net...
Once upon a time *me* wrote:

Philosophically speaking I oppose anything that impedes a website author's freedom of expression. If authors cannot expresses themselves freely then the web serves no purpose.


In what way do following standards prevent your freedom of expression?
So far I have not experience that. Of cause I have sometimes find
other ways to do what I want to do, if I want a page to be valid. But
there is always that other (valid) way to do it.
/Arne


Standards have not as yet impeded my freedom of expression but they might if
browser manufacturers adopt standards that obsolete code in such a way as to
make some sites unusable.
Signed,
me
Jul 24 '05 #54

"Toby Inkster" <us**********@t obyinkster.co.u k> wrote in message
news:pa******** *************** *****@tobyinkst er.co.uk...
c.thornquist wrote:
I'll try to think of analogies in other media & art forms whereby
standards (not related to health & safety) are required to be met,
before publication/viewing by others.


Publishing houses generally insist that standards of grammar and spelling
are followed by their authors.

Most newspapers and magazines, as well as insisting on correct grammar and
spelling, have a house style. For example, the Guardian makes its style
guide available online <http://www.guardian.co .uk/styleguide/>.

(Aside: As an experienced journalist of 50 years' standing once said:
"There are only three words which need a capital letter: God, The Queen,
and the Editor." He was exaggerating, but you get the picture.)

--
Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
Contact Me ~ http://tobyinkster.co.uk/contact


Those are good examples, except there's nothing preventing the printing
presses from operating if those standards aren't met. And there's no
regulatory agency trying to enforce correct grammar by those publishers.
Perhaps there's room for sloppy & correct HTML?

Carla
Jul 24 '05 #55
kchayka wrote:
Philosophical ly speaking I oppose anything that impedes a website author's
freedom of expression. If authors cannot expresses themselves freely then
the web serves no purpose.

It's all about you?
Whether you want to admit it or not, it's really all about your
visitors. Without them, the web serves no purpose.


Why? If my site (personal or business) wants to project a specific
look, feel, flavor, what ever, even though I completely understand that
someone else may not like it or be able to see it. What concern is it
to you? Who cares what I do on the web?

I am not advocating using or not using anything, it is purely an
academic question. And speaking of which, wouldn't what I want to do on
the web be covered under free speech? (Citing US laws) I have a right to
express myself (or company) pretty much how ever I want.

Having said that, I must say I believe a smart business makes their site
by at least attempting to follow the rules.

--
-=tn=-
Jul 24 '05 #56
Greg Schmidt wrote:
The web is (primarily) a visual medium. There is nothing that you can
express visually that cannot be done in such a way that it validates.
This includes using tables for layout? That validates.
Validation is not the be-all and end-all. It is a useful tool.


Truer words can not be spoken.

--
-=tn=-
Jul 24 '05 #57
Travis Newbury wrote:
kchayka wrote:
Philosophica lly speaking I oppose anything that impedes a website author's
freedom of expression. If authors cannot expresses themselves freely then
the web serves no purpose.

It's all about you?
Whether you want to admit it or not, it's really all about your
visitors. Without them, the web serves no purpose.


Why? If my site (personal or business) wants to project a specific
look, feel, flavor, what ever, even though I completely understand that
someone else may not like it or be able to see it. What concern is it
to you? Who cares what I do on the web?


If the site is for your own personal use, feel free to do whatever you
like, but there's not much point in having a web site if you are the
only visitor. If you don't care, no one else will, either.

But, if you want to reach a particular audience, then the purpose of the
site is for the benefit of those visitors, don't you think? The design
should be determined by what *they* want or need, not by the designer's
whims. If you know the target audience likes stuff like Flash and
gratuitous animation, give them what they want, but don't do it just
because the designer likes it. If you don't know what your visitors
want, you should find out.

Otherwise, you could end up alienating the very audience you're trying
to attract.

--
Reply email address is a bottomless spam bucket.
Please reply to the group so everyone can share.
Jul 24 '05 #58
kchayka wrote:
Why? If my site (personal or business) wants to project a specific look, feel, flavor, what ever, even though I completely understand that someone else may not like it or be able to see it. What concern is it to you? Who cares what I do on the web?
If the site is for your own personal use, feel free to do whatever

you like, but there's not much point in having a web site if you are the
only visitor. If you don't care, no one else will, either.

But, if you want to reach a particular audience, then the purpose of the site is for the benefit of those visitors, don't you think?
The design
should be determined by what *they* want or need, not by the designer's whims. If you know the target audience likes stuff like Flash and
gratuitous animation, give them what they want, but don't do it just
because the designer likes it. If you don't know what your visitors
want, you should find out.

Otherwise, you could end up alienating the very audience you're trying to attract.


While probably not the answer most in this group would come up with, I
personally could not agree more.

--
-=tn=-

Jul 24 '05 #59
On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 08:06:21 -0600, "me" <anonymous@_.co m> wrote:
As an aside I do not validate my code. I might implement validation if I
perceived that there was sufficient benefit for me to warrant doing so.

Philosophicall y speaking I oppose anything that impedes a website author's
freedom of expression. If authors cannot expresses themselves freely then
the web serves no purpose.


The idea that working according to standards impedes creativity has been
voiced before in these groups. It is utter myth. This is obvious if you
take a look at the telecommunicati ons sector: this is far more strongly
governed by standards than the Web is, yet it has produced a flood of
new services and products.

--
Stephen Poley

http://www.xs4all.nl/~sbpoley/webmatters/
Jul 24 '05 #60

This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion.

By using Bytes.com and it's services, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

To disable or enable advertisements and analytics tracking please visit the manage ads & tracking page.