Posted by Els on 06/14/05 16:06

Simon wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I know that a site that validates is a good site, because it follows the
> rules given by W3c.

No, not all validating sites are good ones. I bet I can make a really
crappy site, with lots of peek-a-boo bugs to annoy all the IE users,
and still have it validated.

> But I am about to employ a web designer/programmer should I automatically
> reject them if their site does not validate?
> Should I expect the site created by them to validate?

Can't speak for you, but I would.

> Or is it safe to 'accept' a handful of errors?

Depends on the type of error. Most errors are better avoided though.

> My personal felling is, if a designer is selling their services then it
> should validate, but on the other hand I never saw a 'normal' dreamweiver
> page validate.
>
> So what should I accept? what about css, should it validate?

I reckon it should.
And if a designer can't make their dreamweaver code valid, they don't
know how to use the program correctly? There is of course a difference
between someone who allows certain 'errors' to exist, and someone who
simply doesn't /know/ how to make a validating site. Hasn't got
anything to do with dreamweaver afaik.

--
Els http://locusmeus.com/
Sonhos vem. Sonhos vão. O resto é imperfeito.
- Renato Russo -
Now playing: Fleetwood Mac - Need Your Love So Bad

• Next in forum: Anyone interested in workling on a website for pay?
• Prev in forum: Is W3c validation woth the money?
• Thread view: Re: Is W3c validation woth the money?

[Reply to this message]