|
|
Posted by Simon on 06/14/05 16:32
> "Simon" <spambucket@myoddweb.com> wrote:
>
>> I know that a site that validates is a good site, because it
>> follows the rules given by W3c.
>
> If you think so, you do not know what validation is. For an
> explanation, see http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/html/validation.html
personally I prefer the details given by w3c themselves.
http://validator.w3.org/docs/help.htm
> (Validation does not imply that W3C rules are followed. Neither does
> it, or following the rules, imply that the site is a good one. As a
> trivial proof of the latter non sequitur, consider a site that consists
> of a single HTML document that fully conforms to HTML specification and
> has an empty body, say <body><div></div></body>.)
Of course it implies that rules are followed.
It might not look good, or even be useful, but the rules are followed.
> CSS is not an SGML or XML application, so "validation" is an
> incorrect/misleading word in that context.
Again , w3c seems to believe that is a validation. They even offer a tool to
achieve it.
>
> (And what makes you think validation costs money, as you suggest in the
> Subject line but fail to explain or even mention in the message body?)
What I was trying to imply is that a good, 'valid' page would cost more to
develop rather that one put together by a student with limited knowledge of
dreamweaver.
Is spending the extra money to validate really worth it.
Simon
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|