removed

I don't think the default skin is xhtml valid

yeah, 2.1.x skin has a ton of errors on it.

supposedly, it is to be fixed in 3.0.... but who knows.

It'd be nice to have it fixed, but in all honesty it doesn't really bother me much.

Does it look right?

Past that validation is just bragging rights.

Yeah, honestly I do not see the need to be perfectly valid. As long as a site is cross-browser compatible (as much as possible even by validity's standards) then why waste your time being perfect...

That's just it. It is next to impossible to make something 100% cross browser compliant while meeting validity standards.

Hardly. Validating your site is to make sure it is well formed for not just ie and firefox users, but anything else that can hit your site.




Ask Target how they feel about semantics now that they got sued.



100%-- impossible. old browsers don't support stuff right. IE6 is in this same lack-luster category.
code it 100% valid.
degrade it gracefully.
if the user doesn't like what he sees, he has the option to upgrade his software.

It's not just older browsers. I've seen current versions of different browsers show perfectly valid sites in different aspects. That is where the basis for MF's second post came from and mine.

VALID code may not be syntatically correct. You can't base an argument on that.

You know, when you said you were making a XHTML 1.0 compliant skin I figured you were one of those "I like to brag because my code is standard" people.

BOTTOM LINE: Until "standards compliant" code looks EXACTLY the same across ALL BROWSERS there is absolutely NO WAY anyone that expects to earn money designing should care about anything aside from the aesthetics of their pages.

*claps*


I do try to write things that are clear and neat, and usually XHTML 1.0 compliant, but I don't get all stressed about it if it doesn't come out 100%

Can't base an argument on what? You are saying that there is no reason that one should not be valid (or if you want your word, complient) with the XHTML standards. I said that even if your code is 100% valid under those standards it still will not show up exactly the same way in all browsers. So, all being 100% compliant is IS bragging rights. I'd rather my visitors see the same thing across browsers than be 100% compliant.

ALL browsers? It will NEVER happen. EVER. in 2053, there will still be some idiot running NN4.7 lol

In order for the web to evolve, we must move on, and DEGRADE GRAEFULLY for the non-up to date browser users.

And, what about Lynx? its a browser. And don't say no one uses it

Agreed. I fall into the category that I want my pages to function in FF, and look right in IE. Sorry, my time it too valuable to get everything to look right in any other platform, or to make sure it is 100% compliant. I code cleanly, but I don't go nuts either. The amount of hits I get from the other browsers is minimal enough for me not to care. A simple disclaimer that says the site was designed with IE and FF in mind should be plenty. If someone insists on using something else, well, not my problem.

I love you. I really do. Degrade gracefully? But you want your pages up to xhtml 1.0 standards. So what happens when an older browser comes across tags that weren't around back then? Oh that's right, they lose total functionality of your website. What happens when a browser that doesn't support CSS comes along? Oh, right. It won't work. So, how do you, in any way, shape or form, prove that making every page validate to the upmost standard helps to degrade gracefully?

I believe in well formed code just as much as the next guy, but blabbing about standards means nothing.

sorry bro, i'm straight



then, this is NOT a graceful degradation.

Have a look at my homepage.

it validates-- but some ad code breaks it. All errors that are generated are from ypn/adsense/amazon that i have 0 control over...
http://www.hondaswap.com/index.php

use the FF webmaster toolbar, and disbale CSS.

My site is still 100% usable-- only the ads screw up. again, nothing i can do about it.



see above. it will work.



my home page will function and be readable in jsut about everything that supports html 3.
for those using a standards based browser- they will have the best experience
for those using a non-standards based browser, they will see an un-styled, bare bones structure, but its totally usable.



without wellformed code, the degradation doesn't happen correctly, and thus makes the site un-usable.


And then there's the whole other ball park of section 508, WAI, and other tools for the deaf/blind/handicapped.

I didn't go through the hassel on these steps on this particualr site- as i would hope no blind people are driving

The only problem I see is the double single quote error the validation shows, the others are in javascript elements and can't really be dealed with