Posted by Kevin Scholl on 09/14/06 22:13

Runnin' on Empty wrote:

>> We're talking about Web sites, not software development. While there is
>> some overlap with regard to Web-based applications, generally speaking
>> there is a clear distinction between the two.
>
> It depends on what you mean by "web site" ?
>
> Are Dell.com or Amazon.com "websites"? If they are your statement is
> incorrect, if by website you mean a simple static brochure site, then I
> agree with you.

Of course they are Web sites. How does that make my statement in any way
incorrect? Web sites are not software in the true sense of the phrase.
There may be some software running things in the background, but
ultimately what the user sees is passed to the browser as HTML, and
therefore can always be configured to be standards-compliant and valid.

> Example One: you make a site for a local motorcycle dealer (or what ever),
> it got about 10 pages of core navigation (home, about us, new bikes, used
> bikes, parts dept, staff, locations, contact us, bike safety, etc)
>
> Each page is create in Dreamweaver, then gone over by hand,and FTP'd to the
> server. There is no reason for any of these pages not to validate.

Correct.

> Example Two:
>
> You make a web site for a major level real estate and development company,
> it has a similar core navigation for 10, or so pages, only some of the pages
> are maintained by agents using a common javascript CMS tool bar and a PHP
> interface to the Database.

And this precludes validation how...?

> It has several layers of access to various other dynamic functions
> including:
>
> Amazon remote shopping cart that takes Amazon AWS XML feeds to sell books
> both to agents and property prospects,

And this...?

> A proprietary, members only shopping cart written in PHP, that interfaces
> with a database so agents can order sign, business cards, pens and other
> schwag. The Database is maintained by a combo CMS and Cart Admin written in
> PHP.
>
> It includes a Multiple Listings XML feed from a third party provider that
> allows site users to view property descriptions by agent.

Again, why could this not be presented as valid code?

> Also. well you get the picture, I guarantee that this "website" will not
> validate.

Indeed, probably not. But not because it couldn't. What you seem to not
follow is that all of these individual features that are generated from
[wherever] COULD be standards-compliant. They COULD validate. You may or
may not have control over them, unfortunately, depending upon your feed.
But if the various pieces are valid, the whole should similarly be.

> Why not? Because much of the "Front End" HTML and CSS is generated by
> automated process that are impossible to vet to clean code. For instance the
> Amazon data will generate HTML tables that may or may not be in balance
> depending on how many record sets a query returns, hence no validation for
> the HTML.

I reiterate... regardless of what all goes on in the background,
ultimately everything the user sees is sent to the browser as HTML. As
such, if everyone involved does their job, it is perfectly POSSIBLE for
any site as you describe to be accomplished with a standards-based
approach, and indeed even validate. The trick, and the part that is
seldom realized, is getting the various developers to all use that
standards-based approach.

> Most people that have web standards as there goal have never worked on a
> majorly large and dynamic "web site"

I cannot speak for others, but that is certainly not the case for me.

Just because something isn't typically done in practice (for whatever
reason), doesn't mean it CANNOT be done. You seem to be arguing that
it's impossible for anything more than a simple static site to be
standards-compliant and valid. However unlikely it may be to actually
happen, it's perfectly possible to do.

If you are merely saying that it is not often done, then I couldn't
agree more. But there's a difference between not doing something, and
not being able to do it.

That's my point, nothing more.

--

*** 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]