Posted by Kevin Scholl on 09/13/06 00:33

Runnin' on Empty wrote:

> Actually Standards are great as a goal post, but they apply best to static
> brochure sites and not to anything approaching enterprise level.

No offense intended, but I find that to be utter nonsense.

> Do this simple test, run any major enterprise level or ecommerce site
> through the w3c validator, guess what, none validate.

That doesn't mean that they COULDN'T, and indeed, SHOULDN'T. A few
little errors and/or warnings are to varying degrees acceptable, but
when these sites display dozens if not hundreds of validation problems,
that's simply a demonstration of laziness or, worse, complete apathy.

> That's right, the most expensive, intensively used sites with some of the
> best and brightest developers in the country, (or out of the country), that
> are making the most money, don't validate worth beans.

You think these sites are developed by "some of the best and brightest
developers"? Are you serious? Newsflash: most of these sites are
developed either internally or by the lowest bidder, either of which
rarely equates to the "best and brightest".

> The reason is that there is more to successfully using the Internet (or WWW,
> if you prefer), than making sure the HTML or CSS validates.

Indeed, but that's no excuse to not strive for something that is
relatively easy to achieve, and helps eliminate other problems by default.

> Making a simple 10 page vanity site, it should validate and conform to
> standards, working on a major n-tier ecom application with several layers of
> access, admin and functions, backed up by a multi terabyte database, you
> concerns are more making sure it and the multiple functions0 work and are
> secure against improper use, in the IE and Firefox.

Again, no reason why these requirements cannot be met along with largely
valid, standards-based front-end development.

> This often means standards are thrown to the wayside in choosing better
> methods for the task at hand.

By all means, can you suggest any "better methods" that would preclude
the use of recommended standards?

> I know this drives CSS and validation zealots nuts, but it's the case.

Unfortunately, you're right ... it is the case much of the time. But
once again, it really shouldn't be, and certainly doesn't HAVE to be.
And I'm in no way a CSS or validation zealot, just a very experienced
and logical designer and front-end developer who recognizes the clear
advantages to standards-based development.

> I'm all for standards, but they don't apply to every site.

The question is not why to use standards, but rather WHY NOT.

--

*** Remove the DELETE from my address to reply ***

======================================================
Kevin Scholl http://www.ksscholl.com/
kscholl@comcast.DELETE.net
------------------------------------------------------
Information Architecture, Web Design and Development
------------------------------------------------------
We are the music makers, and we are the dreamers of
the dreams...
======================================================

[Back to original message]