|
Web/Social Media
|
|
Written by Matt Handal
|
Is providing website code that doesn’t validate to W3C standards really a web designer red flag? That’s a question that a reader recently asked me in response to my article in SMPS Marketer.
The Question:I guess I don’t really understand what you’re getting at. You pointed out that not being W3C compliant is one of your Red Flags, but you admit that very few sites actually are compliant. So why the red flag? I will admit, this is probably a bit too technical for me, but I guess I’m asking why you would even include this point as a major “red flag” in your magazine piece if most sites disregard its relevance.
My Response:It’s a red flag from the perspective of managing your risk.
Let me give you an example, I had a custom contact database website developed for my firm. I made some pretty strict requirements about it working with multiple server platforms and browsers (not always an easy task). Since I hired the developer through Elance, I didn’t have the proper time to really beta test the system. After a few months, I realized it was still a little buggy when using internet explorer.
I fixed it by simply throwing the CSS code into a program that rewrote it to be W3C compliant. I replaced that one file and now it works perfectly. Looking back, if I had just required the code to validate to W3C standards, I wouldn’t have even have had to worry about problems like that. So that red flag came about as a lessons learned from my experience coordinating the development of that site.
I recently developed a spec for a new Trauner Consulting site. In that spec, despite knowing a bit about code, I specified W3C compliance. Both HelpEverybodyEveryday.com and ConstructionNetcast.com started out as W3C compliant. What broke the compliance was my sloppy text.
I don’t think serious developers disregard w3c. Don’t take my opinion as gospel. Google “importance of w3c” and look at what other people are saying about the subject.
|
Web/Social Media 
