Salis Posted July 5, 2007 Share Posted July 5, 2007 Thanks Daniel0. That then saves me from a few head aches I've been getting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ardyandkari Posted July 7, 2007 Author Share Posted July 7, 2007 ok, i was reading one of my OLD posts...i criticise the idea of validating code... i am no longer critical, just indifferent....but i did search for "why validate css or xhtml"...went to the W3C page, looked around... found a refrence to this page --->http://www.section508.gov/ run a validator on it...i dare you...I DARE YOU!!! total validator comes back with Total errors found: 52(Parsing: 25, HTML: 27) there are more on other pages too.... now, let me ask you... Who r3ally Cares??? not the feds... If you want to have errors in your code which force people to add automatically error checking and correction for every possible error you could make, thus significantly bloating and slowing down and decreasing the stability of all popular browsers, then by all means, continue to put up invalid code. If not, then make sure that your code is standards compliant. The W3C validator makes this extremely easy to do. Judging by your "grammar" (or extreme lack there-of) I'm guessing that you are one of those people that simply does not care whatsoever how horrible what they say and write is, as long as it is possible to decipher, so my wisdom is probably falling on death ears. But at least I tried obviously you didnt read my second post in this thread (although it wasnt necessary)...maybe before you go and be a jerk you should read everything that is said... the fact that i was commenting on was that government page which was advocating compliance to standards was not following its own advice...before making a comment stop and think about what you will say... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azu Posted September 12, 2007 Share Posted September 12, 2007 Maybe you shouldn't talk *******{i cannot control my swearing}********* about W3C just because you suck at making valid websites. Obviously this is just to complicated for someone like you.. oh well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFilmGod Posted September 13, 2007 Share Posted September 13, 2007 Having valid code isn't enough. If you are lazy change your dtd to 4.01 html transitional you don't have to worry about xhtml's nitpickness. I do recommend go beyond "valid code." Valid code means jack S*** when your code is messed from a programming stance. You can create valid code with div tags all over the place. Some elements overlapping and no <h1> tags. Then the valid code means Jack S***. Seriously, THINK SMART. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azu Posted September 13, 2007 Share Posted September 13, 2007 redbullmarky, Oh no I said the "SHIT" word. Sheesh. Are the mods here all pre-teens or something? Don't words in my mouth like a little punk. If you wanna censor the word "SHIT" that's one thing but don't make it look like I said something I didn't. That's just stupid. Take that crap out of my post! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel0 Posted September 13, 2007 Share Posted September 13, 2007 redbullmarky, Oh no I said the "SHIT" word. Sheesh. Are the mods here all pre-teens or something? Don't words in my mouth like a little punk. If you wanna censor the word "SHIT" that's one thing but don't make it look like I said something I didn't. That's just stupid. Take that crap out of my post! Maybe the mods (and possibly other people too) are just tired of your swearing all the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevinM1 Posted September 13, 2007 Share Posted September 13, 2007 I find it odd that Azu was responding to a post written on July 7. I mean, having a thread degrade into flaming two months after it was, for all intents and purposes, dead? Definitely strange. I'm also amused by the charge that removing profanity is a symptom of immaturity. I dunno...I think getting one's panties in a bunch because, oh noes, someone doesn't agree with me about W3C validation, is pretty immature in and of itself. Remember: this is a place for all. As such, you never know if some 10 year old who wants to become a web app programmer is reading these boards. If you are an adult, I believe it would be best to act like it. Profanity, overreactionary posts, and just acting like a tool in general doesn't add to any rational discussion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roopurt18 Posted September 13, 2007 Share Posted September 13, 2007 Profanity, overreactionary posts, and just acting like a tool in general doesn't add to any rational discussion. What about entertainment value? /popcorn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azu Posted September 15, 2007 Share Posted September 15, 2007 I'm sorry for losing my temper. I didn't mean what I said I was just having a tough week. Please let's put it in the past. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wuhtzu Posted September 15, 2007 Share Posted September 15, 2007 I mean like it validates if there is a missing tag what does it matter to be honested if the site works perfect? The only reason your site is working if it's not correct syntax is because the browser you are viewing it in is developed to deal with bad syntax and that is kind of disturbing to me. Because "developers" are getting lazy or gives a rats ass about for example syntax, browsers are being developed to make bad code work. It's a bad/evil circle - browsers that allows bad code to work make "developers" write even worse code and round and round it goes. So it's almost immoral not to care about syntax and W3 validation. I would actually like browsers to throw errors each time they encounter incorrect syntax. Just like parsed languages do.... it would teach markup makers a lesson! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jessica Posted September 15, 2007 Share Posted September 15, 2007 You can turn on errors like that wuhtzu. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wuhtzu Posted September 15, 2007 Share Posted September 15, 2007 I know. I didn't mean for my personal needs. Personally I use such features a lot together with validation. I meant that it would "be great" if it wasn't "optional". All browsers should display the errors as default so that "developers" couldn't present a website with incorrect syntax without letting their users know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jessica Posted September 15, 2007 Share Posted September 15, 2007 yeah. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wuhtzu Posted September 15, 2007 Share Posted September 15, 2007 The only reason why PHP developers does not present pages (containing scripts) with syntax error is because it simply does not work. If PHP could handle incorrect "non important" syntax people would not hesitate to use it Just look at the numbers of "undefined index"-posts we get on the forum. I know it's not incorrect syntax, but it's a similar problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
448191 Posted September 15, 2007 Share Posted September 15, 2007 'Correct' comes in flavours... Do you code with E_STRICT on? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
designationlocutus Posted September 27, 2007 Share Posted September 27, 2007 Off the record... does W3C work for all browsers? I've noticed that IE like to display my page differently than FF. Is this something to take in account? Yes it should do. The W3C validator checks syntax rather than the actual layout (against the specified doctype) so will work in all browsers. As a rule of thumb (I have a few rules of thumb!) I try to get the exact layout in all browsers (one thing that troubles me is when designers insist on non-web safe fonts!). Following the recommendations of the W3C makes cross-browser layout easier to maintain when it comes to adding the CSS and the related browser hacks. Get the Web Developer extension for Firefox and use it to disable CSS and see what your page layout looks like with no styles defined and no images displayed. If the site is readable and structured you have yourself a nice layout Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.