![]() |
Concerned about validation??
I'm taking classes at my local community college towards getting my CIW grand master certification, and something that we've been really discussing as of late is website validation.
Validation is the process by which your HTML/XHTML/CSS, etc., is evaluated to see that all of your code is properly constructed. As some of you may already know, it's almost a requirement that your website be "validated" through the W3C validation tool. (Disability Discrimination Act 2005). Website operators that are non-compliant run the risk of claims being made against them under the Act. There has already been a case in Australia under similar legislation where the claimant was awarded substantial compensation for disability discrimination as a result of a non-compliant website. This means that if you don't have a text-only option for those using disability-tailored browsers, you can get in trouble. What are your thoughts on this, as webmasters? Is this a good move, something to be worried about, or a bad one? |
I don't understand your post. In one paragraph you talk about web standards and in the second paragraph you talk about a law that may affect web sites. Can you post more information?
|
I am not concerned, I always produce valid HTML.
If you indent code well, and use an IDE such as Visual Studio/Komodo Edit/IDE, you can get a valid code. Accessibility is also important, your site must be accessible with mobile phones, video game systems, blind people, If my favorite Linux guide site is not accessible on my Nintendo DS, I cannot go to that site to find guides if my Linux is not working. Just try to make your code valid, and accessible. Validator: http://validator.w3.org Accessibility:http://www.w3.org/WAI/ |
I believe that SpaceMan++ produced a pretty thorough explanation. :).
|
valid code != accessibility
Just remember, these 2 things are separate issues. Both do need to be addressed by modern website coders however. |
Quote:
http://www.mcu.org.uk/training/usestandardmarkup.php http://www.netmechanic.com/news/vol6/html_no20.htm http://www.hobo-web.co.uk/tips/42.htm [QUOTE=SpaceMan++;4109315]I am not concerned, I always produce valid HTML. Quote:
|
If you dont indent, it's hard to find errors by hand
IDEs has automatically validation, so it's just faster, easier and make you care about validation. I use Komodo Edit, which doesn't have Design Mode. Yes, valid code = accessibility, different browser handles errors differently |
I completely agree with Faltzer.
Whenever I code, all my coding is validated from the start, most of the time. I think real coders should use NotePad, even tho I use NotePad++. But I bet professional web designers use Dreamweaver and Frontpage (or w/e the new Microsoft program is called). |
Invalid code are produced by users who keep in Design mode in Dreamweaver and FrontPage They are invalid and not well-indented.
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
If I don't indent, it's so hard to find errors.
Then you give up at fixing errors. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Yes, you don't need Dreamweaver or FrontPage,
Komodo Edit are Notepad++ are all good. |
Tho, a lot of people do start off using something like Dreamweaver. Then they realize it's a joke. But I bet, for the most part, that people just use Pirated versions of Dreamweaver.
|
I used the Trial version of Dreamweaver and I did not like it because it doesn't check PHP syntax.
I produced a lots of Flash crap with Design Mode on Visual Studio. |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
I don't think code validation and ensuring your site is accessible to even the disabled is necessarily the same thing, but I do feel both are important aspects of designing and coding. I know a lot of people ensure their code validates okay at W3C, that their page looks the same in all the major browsers, and consider that the gold standard when there's a lot more to it than that to ensure a website works well for everyone.
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Accessibility is important.
Validation is just a part of accessibility. You must add alt attributes to every images and use <abbr> tag for acronyms.<noscript> for browsers who does not support scripts. You can still use Dreamweaver or other commercial authoring tools, but don't stay in Design Mode all the time. I viewed many fansite's source codes, they used HTML 4.0 and I had a hard time to view it, after I validated it, it had hundreds of errors. My site always get Valid HTML, Valid CSS, and WAI-A icons, and at least you should write a valid CSS. If you use Komodo Edit or other IDEs, it can validate as you type. |
Quote:
To be honest, I don't think even novices should be touching Dreamweaver since it's far too easy to get dependent on the preview/WYSIWYG pane and that, in turn, encourages lazy coding. Buuut, they will anyway because it's easy to make something that looks professional, whether or not it's even viewable in most browers (and obviously won't be very accessible in specialty browsers, etc.) |
Quote:
|
Dreamweaver, Photoshop are all industry standards.
Don't use Microsoft authoring tools such as FrontPage because they used IE's rendering engine. |
Last year (and possibly later this year) we used dreamweaver to make a website in college. I didn't like it but meh. I did alot of it in code/split view though since I prefer coding than the design view. At the end, all my webpages (which I don't have anymore ;-; since something happened to my mem stick that had the stuff on it) were validated HTML/CSS and I think I was the only one in the class who had valid code, others didn't care so much.
when I have it my way, I prefer to use notepad or notepad++* (i think thats the one? colours syntax or something like that) edit: it wasn't notepad++ it was notepad2*, but might check out notepad++ at some point then >_> |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 6:22 PM. |
![]()
© 2002 - 2018 The PokéCommunity™, pokecommunity.com.
Pokémon characters and images belong to The Pokémon Company International and Nintendo. This website is in no way affiliated with or endorsed by Nintendo, Creatures, GAMEFREAK, The Pokémon Company or The Pokémon Company International. We just love Pokémon.
All forum styles, their images (unless noted otherwise) and site designs are © 2002 - 2016 The PokéCommunity / PokéCommunity.com.
PokéCommunity™ is a trademark of The PokéCommunity. All rights reserved. Sponsor advertisements do not imply our endorsement of that product or service. User generated content remains the property of its creator.
Acknowledgements
Use of PokéCommunity Assets
vB Optimise by DragonByte Technologies Ltd © 2023.