Validation is becoming ridiculous!!! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Web Development] >> Accessibility



Message

Mango Himself -> Validation is becoming ridiculous!!! (12/19/2005 15:20:54)

I am a firm believer in order and norms but I feel most validation systems are being developed in order to sell some product either now or later on.

Why do I say this? Very simple!

I've tested over 20 of the top sites I know, including some web developers, software developers and official sites for some state owned entities. Not one has passed a validation!

Validation is, in my opinion, absolutely unnecessary. It is the equivalent of QS 9000 and ISO 9000 methodology. It's not going to make your product any better. If anything, it will curb creativity and design. It doesn't improve, it only validates what you already have. If you put garbage in the prcess, you get garbage product.

Having worked in top companies during the implementation of norms such as the above referred QS and ISO, I can factually state that the end result was the same and even worst in most cases. At Mattel, the year after World Council Norms were introduced and implemented, its production was the worst ever. Same thing at GE during the Six Sigma implementation (and I know a little about that since I am a certified auditor in both ISO and Six Sigma)

I know that some will come forward in defense of such validations in the website industry but I feel they are absolutely a waste of time.

So what if my sites don't pass a validation? People still see them, sell through them, learn through them. That seems to be the general rule.

Very soon we will be offerd software and courses to "help you validate" your sites.

Jus my 2 cents worth



caz -> RE: Validation is becoming ridiculous!!! (12/19/2005 15:39:20)

Oohh, who rattled your cage [8|][;)] I too have been a QA assessor and know that passing the assesssment does not guarantee a quality product, only that the procedures are there to enable quality to be achieved - whether a company just pays lip service to it, or does indeed produce products of intrinsic quality.

Validation is the same, the mechanism is there to enable quality regardless of the merits of the content. However entities with huge table driven sites for example face great costs in reworking them to be valid. They display adequately now, why should they? Well, when the dominant browser IE gets it's overhaul in the next year or so, many of those megalithic sites will start exhibiting problems as users upgrade their browsers.

Then they will have to rethink their complaisant attitude and either redesign or overhaul their existing sites piece by piece. The idea of validation now is to anticipate major changes ahead.



Mango Himself -> RE: Validation is becoming ridiculous!!! (12/19/2005 15:56:04)


quote:

ORIGINAL: caz

Oohh, who rattled your cage

hahahaha!!! Did I come out too strong? Not my intention

Perhaps I am a bit jumpy because one of my clients just said to me that the site I created for him had 4 errors in compliance according to the standard! We are talking about a 55 page site!!! And why does this guy complain? Because a clown in his IT department came across one of those validating sites and ran a test.

You, being into QA as well will probably agree with me that 4 minor nonconformities to the norm are not sufficient to stir up a storm.

Anyway, I try to make my sites conform but I strongly feel validation will eventually backfire at us



womble -> RE: Validation is becoming ridiculous!!! (12/19/2005 16:09:21)

quote:

It's not going to make your product any better. If anything, it will curb creativity and design. It doesn't improve, it only validates what you already have. If you put garbage in the process, you get garbage product.

No reason at all why it should curb creativity and design. There are some fantastic sites out there that validate (I did find a site full of innovative designs demonstrating that validation and creativity aren't mutually exclusive, but seem to have mislaid the bookmark [:(]), but you only have to look at sites like Zen Garden and some of the examples on there to see that's not true.

Most web technologies, with some work can be made valid and accessible. Validation just means that your sites 'should' display properly in standards compliant browsers (of course IE's not included in that).
As Caz says, with M$'s latest offering, new problems will no doubt start to emerge and as the market share of real standards compliant browsers increases, more and more sites are going to find problems. Web designers who start looking at validation are gonna one step ahead. That said I read an article recently (I think it may have been an Alistapart one) that purposefully didn't validate just to prove a point, and played nicely in all the browsers, but you have to know what it's safe to ignore and what not to.

Yes, there are always gonna be companies that jump on the validation bandwagon, in the same way they have with accessibility, but the fact is it's free to validate your site - W3C (and there are free accessibility checkers too). It isn't rocket science and if you know your way round html the validator's helpful (mostly) comments on where you've gone wrong will help you to get valid in no time.

Validation is simply a means to an end (making sure your creations display correctly to as many people as possible), not an end product itself.

With the ever changing web and web technologies, I'd say ignore validation at your peril. Just my $$ worth. [;)]



Mango Himself -> RE: Validation is becoming ridiculous!!! (12/19/2005 16:31:46)

Ladies

You are both right!

If we use validations as a "guideline" of do and don'ts before we create the site itself it may turn out to be an excellent tool.

I was ovelooking the good side of the force and was focusing in the obscure side of it due to a recent headache.

I would like to see a site with a strong creative influence and validated with a no errors compliance. If any of you can dig one up, I would surely learn a lot from it. I'd hate to kill my creativity in the pursue of a validation.

In bull fighting (an activity I do not endorse) the object is for the bullfighter to get as close to the bull as possible. For true bullfighting fanatics, it is considered and artform. There is an old saying regarding bullfighters"

"One step forward and the man may die"
"One step back and the art will die"

I do not want to sacrifice creativity for compliance

You both have made my day, since I thought combining creativity and compliance wasn't viable.



womble -> RE: Validation is becoming ridiculous!!! (12/19/2005 16:53:20)

Of course we're right, we're the stroppy divas around here! [;)]

I'm still trying to hunt out that site I mentioned. Grrr It reeallly annoys me when I think I've bookmarked a site and later then find I haven't! [:@]



caz -> RE: Validation is becoming ridiculous!!! (12/19/2005 16:53:49)

quote:

I would like to see a site with a strong creative influence and validated with a no errors compliance. If any of you can dig one up, I would surely learn a lot from it. I'd hate to kill my creativity in the pursue of a validation.


The Zen Garden is a good place to start. [ Hope that your headache is better - how about a cat dancing across your keyboard instead [;)]]



Mango Himself -> RE: Validation is becoming ridiculous!!! (12/19/2005 17:35:52)

Caz and Womble

very interesting indeed. I don't quite grasp the concept of CSS. I am currently trying to learn more about it.

Now, without this turning int a CSS question (I know there is a forum for that) I do have one doubt: is CSS more in complience per se or can a good validation be attained with an HTML/Flash site as well?



Mango Himself -> RE: Validation is becoming ridiculous!!! (12/19/2005 17:52:45)

That zen Garden is really nice[image][/image]

[image]local://upfiles/17279/3837417BFE6244CFBEEEF4EE622EB285.jpg[/image]



womble -> RE: Validation is becoming ridiculous!!! (12/19/2005 17:58:40)

Hey, where's mine?!?!?! [;)]



Tailslide -> RE: Validation is becoming ridiculous!!! (12/19/2005 18:00:50)

If you follow the recommendations you can get Flash to validate (I've done it). To get certain flavours of markup to validate you have to use CSS at least for presentational information. If you stick with the looser variety you can get a site to validate without it.

(The thing is - validation in itself isn't the issue. Validation is a means to an end - I get my sites to validate so that I know I've used markup correctly according to my DOCTYPE - it's more likely to work cross-browser if I do that. It's quite common that I'll leave off a closing </p> or miss encoding a special character which might cause me problems now or in the future. Then again it might not. From my point of view it's as easy to do it right as not. Very occasionally you run into a problem which you can't find a "valid" solution for in your DOCTYPE. Then you can make an informed decision as to whether to leave it technically invalid as you know it's unlikely to cause a problem or downgrade the DOCTYPE to one that will validate. It's up to you.)

Should you learn CSS - well I think it's the way forward, but then I would since I've used CSS for presentation and layout for a couple of years now.

You need to do what you think is right and follow your own learning curve. There's plenty of information out there - you just need to do a bit of research and then you can make an informed decision.

Compliance is just one ingredient anyway - sites should (in my opinion and in no particular order) be useful, informative, attractive, accessible, cross-browser, fast-loading AND standard compliant (whatever standard you choose). There are plenty that fall flat on several of those criteria and still do ok - whether you try to do all of them is up to you.



Nicole -> RE: Validation is becoming ridiculous!!! (12/19/2005 18:22:59)

Mango,

The whole problem exists because little is known in the beginning about standards and accessibility, but if recognised standards and accessibility are the basis of what one is trying to achieve with a website (and it should be, it should be the bottom denominator), then problems shouldn't exist.

Think of a website as a house, and the availability of new technology / web browsers as being the human aging process.

People build houses on nice hilly blocks of land with nice views and expect to live out their lives in these houses. In reality, either through aging or unforseen accidents, over time, the driveway that was once easy to negotiate, the steps down to the letterbox, the tiered gardens all become inaccessible. Inside the house, the cupboards that are up high, are now hard to reach, the backyard clothes line never gets used and a temporary one is added to the back of the house constructed of wire and plastic. As these people age and require walking frames, or those who've suffered injuries and now require a wheelchair, the doorways inside the house aren't quite wide enough, light switches are awkward to reach, the kitchen and bathrooms are now almost totally unmanageable, outward opening doors are a nightmare and so all of these problems are solved by altering them, at extra cost and also making the once nice looking house suddenly look awful. Ramps are included to all outdoor areas and so on.....

The house looks ugly because accessibility wasn't considered when building the house.

Back to websites, if you begin with an idea for a site and also begin with the notion that you want that site to stand the test of time, follow standards and be accessible, look nice and function properly, with each new feature added to the site at construction stage, thought should be given as to how that new feature will affect standards compliance and accessibility.

If a new feature may impact negatively on the original goal of standards compliance and accessibility, then seek a work-around, if one just isn't possible then don't add that feature, or if you do, then add it in the knowledge that the site is now not standards compliant and/or accessible, and as in the house example, may not be useful in the future.

Nicole



Mango Himself -> RE: Validation is becoming ridiculous!!! (12/19/2005 18:27:12)

Womble,

thought I'd forgotten you? Never

Tailslide, excellent info, Thanks. Did I tell you I love your website?

[image]local://upfiles/17279/FB456799C241410D99F2CFB750EB2CAA.gif[/image]



womble -> RE: Validation is becoming ridiculous!!! (12/19/2005 18:35:30)

Hey Mango, you been sneaking in and taking pics of me again?! [;)]



Mango Himself -> RE: Validation is becoming ridiculous!!! (12/19/2005 18:35:38)

Nicole (the one with the beautiful name, I insist)

your analogy has helped me even further. I love getting so much help from the top ladies here! You are all so nice!

All of you are right! I was looking at validation as something that is done after the site is completed when it is a valuable resource while creating the site itself.

One last question, is it advisable to run frequent validations during the fabrication of a site?



Mango Himself -> RE: Validation is becoming ridiculous!!! (12/19/2005 18:44:58)

Womble,

Yep! I always keep my camera handy

Minstrels huh?

[image]local://upfiles/17279/154B5D9593B14485B7FA2EAAB3BB6A53.gif[/image]



Mango Himself -> RE: Validation is becoming ridiculous!!! (12/19/2005 18:50:46)

Ladies,

in all seriousness, I want to thank you all for taking your time in helping me with all this doubts.

I have been making a pretty good living by creating websites and I believe that all the ability in the world is worthless without other people's help and opinions.

Thank you very much



womble -> RE: Validation is becoming ridiculous!!! (12/19/2005 18:57:15)

[:D] @ pic

not that sort silly! [;)]

/hands Mango some proper Minstrels

quote:

One last question, is it advisable to run frequent validations during the fabrication of a site?

Yup, saves a shed load of hassles at the end when you discover you've got all the minor problems to sort out at the end.

Help's what we're all here for - the giggles come as an extra freebie. [;)]



dpf -> RE: Validation is becoming ridiculous!!! (12/20/2005 9:13:12)

quote:

with M$'s latest offering, new problems will no doubt start to emerge and as the market share of real standards compliant browsers increases, more and more sites are going to find problems.
I'm not so sure that will happen. MS has a long history of trying to be backward compatible. Their desire to continue support for old DOS applications was the prime reason that versions of Windows up to XP would crash.

Since many non valid sites are that way because people used M$-centric code, what would the fallout be if suddenly M$ issues a browser that "breaks" those sites? huge. I suspect (cant prove or substantiate) that M$ will issue a browser that renders valid code esacly correct but tries to also display invalid code close to what the designer wanted.

There is a certain glee in the designer community when an invalid site fails to render in FF but if you were a business person - a "web consumer" would you see that as a good thing? no. it is elitist but not consumer friendly. fact of the matter is that standards have come after-the fact and while they point the way to better coded sites, they are not rules that govern or control the internet and the web is growing in the opposite direction - "web-in-a-box" anyone can make a web site grows by leaps and bounds. Word processing software can write html (not valid of course) and consumers WANT those sites to work.

<ducks>



Tailslide -> RE: Validation is becoming ridiculous!!! (12/20/2005 9:48:34)

Dan

The standards that I follow were laid down in 1998 - so not exactly a new thing! IE6 was released in 2000...

I think that there will be problems with backwards-compatibility for IE7 - reason I say this is possibly through ignorance but I don't see how IE7 can be standard compliant AND backwards compatible where the two conflict - if you see what I mean.

I don't get any joy from seeing sites fail in decent browsers - it makes me feel slightly queasy that clients were sold sub-standard websites especially by the big web design firms who have the money to get the "right" people in.

IE7 being compliant also doesn't make life any easier in the short to medium term as I've heard it'll only be available on Longhorn - so we're stuck with "old" IE6, 5.5 and 5 for quite a few years plus whatever new stuff IE7 throws up (chances of it being 100% are fairly low I think).



dpf -> RE: Validation is becoming ridiculous!!! (12/20/2005 9:58:10)

quote:

The standards that I follow were laid down in 1998 - so not exactly a new thing! IE6 was released in 2000...
..when I started in 1999, every book I read said :"yes there are new standards and css will be woderful but dont use them!! - why? no browsersupport". In addition, just because a browser is issued that supports a standard, there will be many browsers with out it - it takes time.
quote:

but I don't see how IE7 can be standard compliant AND backwards compatible where the two conflict - if you see what I mean.

..easily doctype! if a designer labeled his/her page with doctype, apply that standard exactly - if they didnt; then "do the best you can mode"

FF and standards are fine for designing your own site - good way to get the code correct. hoiwever, applying validation to someone elses site ignores the question of when was it built? lots of sites out there built long ago and so applying todays standards to them is pointless. If you choose to use FF or a standards compliant browser for personal surfing, I think its arrogant and elitist to proclaim "oh that site didnt render - it isnt valid" you dont know when it was built. you can use a browser that you choose - for personal use, i always choose the one that renders the sites i need to see.



Tailslide -> RE: Validation is becoming ridiculous!!! (12/20/2005 10:17:31)

Yes if everyone used DOCTYPES and coded according to that it'd be great! Problem is if they don't include it AND use "modern" markup - some of that doesn't work with the fall-back HTML3 or whatever the browsers fall back to - so it could cause problems still.

If a site was built 5 years ago or plus - but built well (HTML 3, 4 whatever) then it should have no problems now or in the near future. If it was built badly it doesn't matter when it was built. Sloppy coding is sloppy coding whenever it was done. Good coding will go on and on ....

I'm not delighted with some of the sites I did 3/4 years ago (no they're not on my portfolio before you go digging!) even though they validated back then according to the available standards (shock horror - table layouts!) - you go on to learn new stuff and get better at what you do.

(Anyway - what's wrong with being elitist? I'm all in favour of being elitist - drag standards up all round! As we've found in the UK in many different areas of life - pandering to the lowest common denominator just brings everyone down to that level)



Mango Himself -> RE: Validation is becoming ridiculous!!! (12/20/2005 12:05:40)


quote:

Anyway - what's wrong with being elitist? I'm all in favour of being elitist - pandering to the lowest common denominator just brings everyone down to that level)


I couldn't agree more!

I feel Dan speaks the truth and I also believe Helena speaks the truth. How can two diverging points be the truth? Because there will always be tastes for all preferences.

I started out this thread with a perspective on validation that now, a few posts later, is a different perspective.

I too have created sites in the past that did not conform to any standard and my customers love them even though I've tried to revamp their sites at no charge.

Yet, I long for excellence. I want to be able to create sites that are validated by some serious entity. Why? Because it's good for business. Because that way, the kid in his room, listening to hip hop will not beat me to the customer.

I feel the future in web design involves a high quality product, validated and with a flawless browser integration. Will that be achievable? We don't know, but I am sure we're. at least, trying to achieve it.

Truth is, as much as we all love creating web sites, we are into it for a reason: $$$ So, let's offer a top quality site.

Just my feelings.

One silly question in order to clear the air a little: do any of you show some of your early work in your portfolio? Wouldn't it be a funny thing if we created a section were we show our early works? I guarantee some of my early projects would likely get me banned from this and all forums hahaha!!!



dpf -> RE: Validation is becoming ridiculous!!! (12/20/2005 12:13:13)

quote:

How can two diverging points be the truth?
bear in mind the point I was making - not that standards are wrong or unimportant but I was addressing the notion the an IE standards compliant browser would suddenly "break" millions of sites - I dont thnk that is in anyones best interest (well, it is in our best interest - those of us looking for work it would make the 1849 gold rush and y2k look like chump change!)

the wc3 - as well intentioned and honorable as they are is a self appointed "ruler of the web" - i do think standards are important - without them its a nightnmare but their authority to force compliance just doesnt exist.
suppose a company suddenly invented a tag that would make web authoring and the web experience suddenly improve 100 fold - should they sit on it and hope wc3 incorparates it or should they use it to gain marker advantage? that is where the IE/Netscape battle was and could happen again.

M$ is not, repeat not, going to issue a browser that suddenly doesnt render prior M$ centric code that is not Compliant"- wont happen.



Tailslide -> RE: Validation is becoming ridiculous!!! (12/20/2005 12:17:56)

quote:

One silly question in order to clear the air a little: do any of you show some of your early work in your portfolio? Wouldn't it be a funny thing if we created a section were we show our early works? I guarantee some of my early projects would likely get me banned from this and all forums hahaha!!!


I'd never get a paying customer again if I did that!

My first website was a pink table-based page with Frames. The stunning content of the pinkness was a picture of my ancient Land Rover and featured lots of exclamation marks! All over the place! After every sentence! Just like this! But then it was 1998 so I've forgiven myself.



Mango Himself -> RE: Validation is becoming ridiculous!!! (12/20/2005 12:40:07)

Helena and Dan

I feel M$ could come up with a browser that allows old sites to run as well as new ones. It would cost a lot of research but they probably could. Now, let's asume they can only go two ways: a) they stay with what they already have or b) they create something that makes all older sites look like a Fellini movie. On option a), we already see what's going on. On option b), I feel those of us who are really getting involved into creating top quality, norm conforming sites will benefit.

I put my money on option c) M$ will release a browser with an extension that'll allow the visitor to see the site in IE 6 and previous versions. (similar to the extension we use on Firefox)

Whatever M$ does, I insist: for a paying customer, it's easier to sell them on a validated, norm adhering site than the one your average weekend designer can create.

I, for one, will try to make my sites adhere to the norm



dpf -> RE: Validation is becoming ridiculous!!! (12/20/2005 12:46:20)

quote:

make my sites adhere to the norm
...lol, careful with your choice of words! I suspect that "norm" does NOT equate to valid code!!!

as I said earlier, the secret is in doctype. no designer, no matter what tools they used, has a right to complain if they chose to post a doctype and the site doesnt validate to that site so M$ can move its browser into compliance vis-a-vis the doctypes and then the sites without doctype will be more leniantly rendered. What they cannot afford is millions of people who used their products Frontpage, Word, PP, Presentations to make a site and then M$ sys "your code isnt valid". We may say that Word and PP arent for making web sites but remember, those products are sold with that as a feature.



Tailslide -> RE: Validation is becoming ridiculous!!! (12/20/2005 12:50:50)

I think that IE7 will be at least 75% standard compliant probably a bit more - but then I'm an optimist! I think that as Dan says it will probably be backwards compatible although as I've said I don't know if that makes the browser itself less theoretically "standard compliant" - no-one but me will care about semantic rubbish like that!

Why am I not overjoyed at the thought that IE will finally be almost good? Because we'll be dealing with legacy browsers for years to come trying to ensure that sites work in IE5, 6 and 7. If IE7 does some things right and some wrong (which is likely) then that means an extra layer of fiddling required to get sites to work everywhere.

If IE7 is available on XP then the legacy browser problem will hopefully only last another 3 years or so. If IE7 is only available on Longhorn then you're looking at another 10 years of dealing with the old rubbish (based on how many people are still using Win 95, 98 and ME).



dpf -> RE: Validation is becoming ridiculous!!! (12/20/2005 12:54:45)

quote:

If IE7 does some things right and some wrong (which is likely) then that means an extra layer of fiddling required to get sites to work everywhere.
..very true - almost makes you say competition is a bad thing, eh? <hehe> I mean - life would be simpler if there was one and only one browser target to hit, right?
but remember, ever if their new browser does everything "right" as you call it, old browsers will still be out there. If you had paid $50,000 or $100,000 for a huge site in 1999 and the web company said "we cannot meet the wc3 standards because they just came out and there is no browser support", would you want to see all browsers now abandaon your site?



Mango Himself -> RE: Validation is becoming ridiculous!!! (12/20/2005 13:14:56)

On the other hand, let's analyze this scenario:

M$ launches its new IE7 and it is not compatible with older coding

Rather than having over 90% of the people surfing the web via IE, it would spread into 3-4 major browsers.

Obviously, we, as designers must work harder to make sure websites can be displayed in as many browsers as possible. I mean, right now, if your project is visible in IE you are pretty much sure about 90% of the visitors will be able to open it without major problems, right? Therefore, our current effort is to make it adhere to the requirements of IE and we're prety much ok, aren't we?

Now, with four major players in the browser scene, we will have to work harder to make our sites compatible, won't we?

And in closing, will customers be willing to pay in order to have their site visible and functional in most browsers? I feel that's where the area of opportunity resides. Please correct me if I 'm wrong before I fully immerse myself into CSS and W3C validation



Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.09375