W3C validator

[Joshua203]

How much credit would you give the w3c validator and the errors it might show

i mean lots of errors look just fine when viewed in more than one browser but officially they still are errors

do you check and run away because of the amount of work to repair, do you think it s important to repair every single error you get, do you also validate the css etc etc

comments and/or votes welcome... it s up to you

 

[taha116]

I dont really like i give it a little priority... but not allot. Id pay som1 credits to do it for me. Thats it. I dont see to much of a point if my site works fine when it comes to cross browser compatibility.

 

[zapzack]

I dont really like i give it a little priority... but not allot. Id pay som1 credits to do it for me. Thats it. I dont see to much of a point if my site works fine when it comes to cross browser compatibility.

It's good to fix most of the errors as there are browsers that will not see your site correctly.

 

[Smith6612]

I like to keep everything I code under W3 standards, so of course I use the validator after I check over my code to see if anything I didn't catch, the Validator finds.

 

[taha116]

I know that but i cross browser check things myself anyways plus allot of browsers still see things diferently even if its validated.

 

[Joshua203]

i forgot to add my own opinion and vote

i like to check it and see where i messed up, sometimes solving one error takes away 30 others, i think it s a great tool but i do sometimes descide to leave some errors in because they do not work cross platform but also do not cause problems in other browsers

so in short i voted the top choice because i like to remove all errors with a few exceptions (i now accept 7 css errors for scrollbar colouring in explorer)

thank you for all your opinions keep em comming :biggrin:

 

[Twinkie]

I find it important to stick to the standards. The more people that do, the more compliant browsers will become. However, if I find an error in an element that is necessary to the page, I won't stress over a perfect score. I use Dreamweaver validation instead of the w3c one.

 

[alexandgruntz]

My latest website is W3C compliment, HTML, CSS and all. :biggrin:

Although, sometimes it picks up on errors which browsers are fine with.

 

[Kayos]

Moved to Graphics and Webdesign. See Post 13

 

[zapzack]

My site is valid.. http://www.zapzack.com (CSS is only CSS3.0 valid.. CSS2 Gives errors about having CSS3.0 features.. heh)

 

[taha116]

I didnt think this was off topic and would have been fine in crossfire... but there is barley ant crossfire... everyone agrees except me lol. check the poll

 

[Joshua203]

i don t think it should have been moved either, i ve spend time looking if i understood correct that this could be posted in crossfire and thought yeah it belongs but also i don t care about it

i ll just never post in crosfire again simple as that

was that crossfire worthy????

 

[Kayos]

You're asking for the opinions of others and while opinions are a big part of Crossfire it's not what crossfire is. Crossfire is a debating forum and this thread is far from a debate. If the OP conveyed the thread in a more debatable light instead of listing a few predetermined responses in the poll then yeah it would be appropriate.

But the more I think about it this thread doesn't need to be in off topic either. So I'll just move it to Graphics and Webdesign, where it should have originally have been posted.

 

[farscapeone]

Yes I use it to check my work. It's always a good idea to stick to standards. That way you'll probably spend less time making your web sites cross-browser compatible. Don't forget that many clients are asking for it these days.

 

[ichwar]

I use it to catch the big errors that might throw off some browsers or the search engines, but the little errors I just ignore as long as my sight looks good.

 

[jtwhite]

I find it really important to stick with standards. We all know one thing that doesn't stay with standards..... Internet Explorer.

 

[vekou]

What's the use of the standards if you're not going to follow them (*cough* Microsoft *cough*).

Although most of the time*, websites look similar on "MAJOR" browsers, so there would be no problem for the users. But what about the not-so-popular browsers or even search engine crawlers, they might perceive your page differently.

 

[roadierich]

I use it constantly throughout development.

I write php, and it's very easy to output poorly formatted html if you're not paying full attention. So my process for major changes is:

1. save changes.
2. Check page loads correctly
3. Check any behind the scenes changes are correct
4. Validate & correct html

As far as I'm concerned, html is the lowest priority after getting the site working how I want it to, but it's important for it to be correct, so that you know it will display correctly on ALL browsers, even thouse you don't have yourself.

Of course, I think it's foolish not to have as many webbrowsers installed as possible if you're concerned about cross browser compatibility.

 

[str82u]

I'm pretty uptight about it now, though my older sites could use it, they scare me and work fine it seems.