HTML : LUSENET : WebDevelopers : One Thread


-- Anonymous, March 13, 2001


From: Mike808 Save Address Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 23:06:42 -0500 To: Subject: STLWEBDEV: HTML Validators Reply-To:

"Leland V. Lammert" wrote: >

Only validates to the W3C standards. Not necessarily what will degrade gracefully or even display properly in the real-world browsers.

Check out for stuff the W3C will happily validate as complying with the spec, but will fail to render per the spec because of the imperfect implementations in the various browsers.


I tend to use a style of utilizing whitespace as visual cues for maintainers and that minimizes right-shifting-code-from-tab-itis. I'll often collapse "artifact" elements of the page that don't change across the entire site or are incidental to the core purpose of the page to minimize their visual distraction from the more important code in the page. Tidy doesn't tend to understand the "visual" nature of looking at a page's source code, particularly if you're in maintenance mode (or more importantly, _someone else_ is) and you want them to zero in on the problem / active area of the page as fast as possible.

And then there are other times where canonizing whitespace causes the browser to render a space when you don't want *any* (e.g. cells containing images of exact sizes). Tidy's rules of it's idea of what your HTML should look like don't always coincide with mine. And if your document isn't validated before you "tidy" it up, it can really hose the way it looks.

> DreamWeaver 4 does a pretty decent job of code cleanup.

I've seen some pretty atrocious HTML that doesn't validate from DreamWeaver 4. Particularly framesets and rollover stuff. Besides, who needs all that JavaScript code bloat just for rollovers?

I'm glad to see you *do* validate your code. It demonstrates you care about what you'll put your name on. It also makes it easier for repurposing existing pages, not necessarily for human consumption. :)


-- Anonymous, April 11, 2001

Moderation questions? read the FAQ