bugleak.com — All the blogs in the Technorati Top 20 list of popular blogs fail the well-known W3C Markup Validation test. This probably means that complying to the W3C standards is not a priority for the most popular content creators on the planet.
Aug 6, 2007 View in Crawl 4
bpapaAug 7, 2007
OK... your first example is correct... but standards compliance goes hand in hand with semantic markup and the average page exhibiting both of those characteristics is going to be much smaller than the average page that doesn't adhere to any standards. No matter how many ampersands there are.
fkr3Aug 7, 2007
ESPN could save the same volume of bandwidht a day with invalid-but-concise code.
greyfadeAug 7, 2007
Every developer on the planet should give a f**k. And I'll give you a practical reason: When your HTML validates from the start, it will be several orders of magnitude easier to make it look the same in every browser on the internet... including IE. (At which point, you're just using one or two simple CSS hacks to make IE do things right. If you're using more than 3 or 4 "hacks," you're doing it wrong.) And when your HTML doesn't validate, someone, somewhere, is going to see a horrendously broken page.Would it surprise you to know that digg validates?
greyfadeAug 7, 2007
Believe it or not, a rich editor is not difficult to write. (I did it in about 3 hours to write one that works in Firefox and IE.) True, the code it makes looks like s**t, but Javascript has this incredible feature no one seems to know exists: Regular expressions. It is *NOT* difficult to reparse or rewrite the output of a WYSIWYG editor to be properly compliant. There are many corner cases to account for, yes, but it is not difficult.
proctorAug 8, 2007
Who gives a s**t? Nothing ever goes right in IE anyways. All the other browsers would display it fine with tons of errors.
tempestssAug 8, 2007
He's right
kevptimAug 9, 2007
I like how this guy bitches about obscure standards and errors while his url for BoingBoing is incorrect. Some errors don't matter, some, like urls, do.
pooleyadenAug 18, 2007
Greatness and goodness are not means, but ends.
nknyshJan 22, 2008
Perhaps they spend resources they could spend for that validity to other things like producing value to their visitors. I believe that's better use of resources. However, you may find this link interesting: <a class="user" href="http://validator.w3.org/docs/why.html">http://validator.w3.org/docs/why.html</a>
nknyshJan 22, 2008
Perhaps they spend resources they could spend for that validity to other things like producing value to their visitors. I believe that's better use of resources. However, you may find this link interesting: <a class="user" href="http://validator.w3.org/docs/why.html">http://validator.w3.org/docs/why.html</a>
manishsinha27Jul 10, 2008
Please dont mention IE when it comes to implementing Web Standards in browsers....
dannywhite1Dec 2, 2008
it just shows that seo friendly doesn't mean W3C Markup Validation!<a class="user" href="http://www.dwhitewebdesign.com/">http://www.dwhitewebdesign.com/</a><a class="user" href="http://www.2let2sell2buy.com/">http://www.2let2sell2buy.com/</a><a class="user" href="http://www.whomain.com/">http://www.whomain.com/</a><a class="user" href="http://www.visitcamposol.com/">http://www.visitcamposol.com/</a>