Re: "Valid (X)HTML/CSS"?!

Everything related to the visual and coding aspects of websites.
Post Reply
Robin
Events Staffer
Posts: 3072
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2014 3:15 pm
Location: North Carolina, USA
Contact:

Re: "Valid (X)HTML/CSS"?!

Post by Robin »

---
MOD EDIT

The first post in this topic has been deleted; the conversation below is preserved because we believe it's insightful. The original post questioned why members in this community in particular added "valid HTML"/"valid CSS" remarks to the footer of their sites.
---

I believe the practice of putting "Valid HTML/CSS" started as a way to make shrine makers aware that there were web standards for the various languages we used, and that making our sites "valid" made them more accessible to all users. I would have never known about the W3C, for instance, if it hadn't been for seeing "valid XHTML/CSS" on several of my online friends' sites and clicking the links.

Now the practice is a little outdated, as you noted, but for its time (early to mid-2000s, especially) it was nifty shorthand for passing the word about web standards along. :)
Last edited by Lethe on Fri Jul 01, 2016 1:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
~ a dream is a wish your heart makes ~
withinmyworld.org
Laura
Posts: 499
Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2014 2:10 am
Location: Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Re: "Valid (X)HTML/CSS"?!

Post by Laura »

Why validation matters - Good explanation from w3 about why it's important, for anyone curious. :D

Personally, if someone puts "Valid HTML/CSS" at the bottom of their personal websites, I see absolutely nothing wrong or unprofessional about it. They're simply stating that they, as a developer, value validation and that they have done it for their sites. People in general might not care if the site is valid or not, but there are people who may care to know. It has generally gone out of style over the last few years though (posting the validation, not the actual validation itself of course). :9

The emphasis, IMO, is that these are personal sites. It doesn't matter if you're a professional or not, the site is still personal and if the owner chooses to include that in the footer, I don't really see a problem with it. Wouldn't affect my opinion on them or their site one way or another, in the end. XD
Masao
Host
Posts: 579
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 12:29 am
Contact:

Re: "Valid (X)HTML/CSS"?!

Post by Masao »

I agree with Robin, specifically on the trend as a way to make others aware there is a standard, because a lot of us came from a amateur/hobby perspective, and probably didn't know any better. Once I knew about validation in HTML, I made sure to validate my code as a way to learn and improve my HTML/CSS, and it's because I cared about writing valid code that I've improved and during and after my computer science degree, made sure my code was always up to standard.

Years back, when the trend started, I remember quite a lot of sites that did not have proper headers and valid HTML structure, and while they loaded most of the time, occasionally the CSS would fail to load because it wasn't placed between <head></head>, it was on older browsers, but all the same I don't like the idea that what I made was only passable because the browser was so lax it allowed it.

And auto-complete IDEs are nice, I definitely love using Sublime Text at home and Visual Studio at work, but I personally feel like if I started relying on the, I would forget some of the basics if I had to write it free-hand. In the professional software development world, no one cares a bit if you can write with or without help from an IDE (they all use IDEs at some point), but for me personally, I like to use them as a tool to help, not a tool to rely on.
THE FATE OF DESTRUCTION IS ALSO THE JOY OF REBIRTH.
Laura
Posts: 499
Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2014 2:10 am
Location: Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Re: "Valid (X)HTML/CSS"?!

Post by Laura »

I just wanna agree with what Masao and Robin are saying, that it was a really good way of getting people who were doing it as a hobby to become aware about validation and standards. I guess it still is; anyone who's just getting into it as a hobby might not be aware! :D
User avatar
Camy
Administrator
Posts: 1482
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2012 9:21 pm
Location: Texas
Contact:

Re: "Valid (X)HTML/CSS"?!

Post by Camy »

Before HTML5 rolled in, XHTML was a big thing.

XHTML was four things:
  • A way to make people code right (all lowercase, no caps, / in the img tag, and so on)
  • The blind could navigate through the internet with screen readers
  • Those without CSS turned on could also navigate
  • Rendered it correctly across all current browsers at the time.
It helped me get better at coding HTML and CSS after I found out about it before joining Amassment back in 2009.

The validator still works and the plugins can be ignored (which I and others have done). Plus, it's still relevant to those who wishes to use it. While it's not a big deal, it's a good way for other people to practice to transition from HTML4 to XHTML Traditional to XHTML Strict and then HTML5, if they wish to gradually go into HTML5 rather than just jump in.

It was also a way for people to feel good that they accomplished something new (which is how I felt when first coming upon XHTML and tried it). Heck yeah I wanted to show it off xD

If they want to show it off still, sure, why not. I used it to showcase in my shrines (Sesshoumaru and Ulquiorra site still has it + others) and while it doesn't matter to me anymore, it also doesn't bug me at all to see it, professional or personal.
I accept your challenge, "high prince", but I am no general.
Mikari
Posts: 3159
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2012 6:30 pm
Location: Coruscant
Contact:

Re: "Valid (X)HTML/CSS"?!

Post by Mikari »

I don't validate as I go along, but none of the code I use is complex enough for an intermediate user to make significant mistakes and not catch them immediately since I do preview all the time. I validate everything when it's fully coded and if any mistakes are actually found by the validator it's always something easy to fix that I can take care of in two minutes and revalidate. The only things the validator doesn't like are the vendor extensions, but getting rid of those would prevent certain things from working on some browsers, such as Safari.

I still like to give Chrome a recommendation, not because the site can't be viewed on other browsers, but because it's my favorite. I preview on the latest Firefox, Opera and Safari as well (if it's a webdesign job I'll check Internet Explorer too). There are certain Chrome-only features that I enjoy, despite them not being in any way vital, just because they're pretty and I like the ease with which Chrome integrates them. I know there are workarounds, but because it's not vital, it doesn't feel worth the extra work, though I still appreciate having an accessible version of these effects and want to do my small part in encouraging browsers to adopt such CSS features if only to compete. (webkit scroll bars <3)

I think XHTML was when I first started to pay attention to validation, before that, in my rookie HTML4 days my code was never valid, though this was a distant past when I didn't shudder at the mention of Internet Explorer and it still dominated the web. As for the validation links, I don't care either way as long as I can view the site on my PC/laptop preferably on some webkit browser. I rarely browse on mobile, since when I'm out of the house I'm busy doing something and I take my laptop to work so I have that during breaks.
Post Reply