Validity of HTML and W3C Standards

[news]

I am a fairly new usesr to Frontpage 2002 (2 years), and usually I have
just cared about how the pages render on IE. Lately I and others are
accessing my site with Mozilla. While trying to fix rendering
differences between IE and Mozilla has lead me to information regarding
HTML and XHTML standards as defined by the World Wide Web Consortium
(W3C). I have observed that the HTML generated by Frontpage 2002
violates many of these standards, as seen by feeding the Frontpage
generated web sites into the validator web site:
http://validator.w3.org/
What do some of you more experienced web designers have to say about the
W3C standards? Are they something that Frontpage and other web authoring
tools are taking seriously, and therefore we will see better compliance
in the future? I know Mozilla and other non-Microsoft browsers are
currently the extreme minority, but the growing Linux and Mozilla
movement might at least slightly shake up the Microsoft world. Stricter
standards compliance on web pages would benefit us all by allowing
rendering consistency across a larger audience.

 

[Thomas A. Rowe]

First the W3C doesn't issue standards, just recommendations.

The most important issue to be concerned with, is how does your page display
in various browsers that are or will visit your web site. This is hard to
tell if you are putting up a site for the first time or if your host doesn't
provide a good tool to view the server log file for your web site, such as
Urchin or WebTrends.

If you really want to spend the effort to have you site pass the validators,
then based on the report generated, you have to then remove those items that
fail and come up with a different approach to accomplish whatever it was
that failed.

Personally, I try to stay as close to the HTML 3.2 recommendations as
possible, this way almost all browsers should have no problems viewing the
sites I create for my clients. My clients are interested in getting traffic
that will hopefully may purchases, and they don't want to hear from a client
that couldn't access the site because the client happens to be running NS4,
etc.

--

==============================================
Thomas A. Rowe (Microsoft MVP - FrontPage)
WEBMASTER Resources(tm)

FrontPage Resources, Forums, WebCircle,
MS KB Quick Links, etc.
==============================================

 

[Steve Easton]

At the risk of starting another long thread
concerning W3C:....

W3C issues "recommendations" not "mandates,"
And is "behind the power curve" when it comes
to browser "technology."

You can design your pages so that they validate
at W3C and they may or may not render correctly in
all browsers.

As for FrontPage and invalid code, it's not the program
that creates invalid code just because it doesn't "validate,"
it's the designer using features that are not cross browser
compatible that results in validation issues.

As for Mozilla, <imho> ( and I am an open source fan )
the sun is setting on this issue, because the owner / sponsor
of Mozilla ( AOL ) recently handed them $3,000,000 and
basically said "your on your own" as a result of the recent
AOL MSFT settlement.

 

[John A]

Thank you for the insight.

--
John A

At the risk of starting another long thread
concerning W3C:....

W3C issues "recommendations" not "mandates,"
And is "behind the power curve" when it comes
to browser "technology."

You can design your pages so that they validate
at W3C and they may or may not render correctly in
all browsers.

As for FrontPage and invalid code, it's not the program
that creates invalid code just because it doesn't "validate,"
it's the designer using features that are not cross browser
compatible that results in validation issues.

As for Mozilla, <imho> ( and I am an open source fan )
the sun is setting on this issue, because the owner / sponsor
of Mozilla ( AOL ) recently handed them $3,000,000 and
basically said "your on your own" as a result of the recent
AOL MSFT settlement.

 

[Andreas Prilop]

What do some of you more experienced web designers have to say about the
W3C standards?

I suggest to ask in <or
in <but not in a Microsoft proprietary newsgroup.

 

[John A]

Good point. I wasn't aware of those newgroups.

 

[Guest]

It's all Bullshit

----- John A wrote: ----

Good point. I wasn't aware of those newgroups

 

[Guest]

There are great web designers and more professionals hanging out here than in your clique newsgroups. Take your bottom posting net nanny attitude elsewhere. You don't belong here

----- Andreas Prilop wrote: ----

What do some of you more experienced web designers have to say about the
W3C standards

I suggest to ask in <o
in <but not in a Microsoft proprietary newsgroup

 

[John A]

Wow, looks like Mo hit a nerve. I didn't mean to provoke an argument. I
don't think Mo implied there were not professionals here, just maybe
suggesting that these other newsgroups would provide a perspective outside
of the Frontpage users.

And about your top/bottom posting comment: I often wondered why certain
groups have gravitated to one or the other. I always try to "go with the
flow" of the newgroup I am in. Also what a net nanny and why are the bottom
posters ?

 

[Thomas A. Rowe]

John,

FYI: If you choose to post in those other groups and you want to get a
objective reply to your post, do not mention Microsoft or FrontPage.

--

==============================================
Thomas A. Rowe (Microsoft MVP - FrontPage)
WEBMASTER Resources(tm)

FrontPage Resources, Forums, WebCircle,
MS KB Quick Links, etc.
==============================================

Wow, looks like Mo hit a nerve. I didn't mean to provoke an argument. I
don't think Mo implied there were not professionals here, just maybe
suggesting that these other newsgroups would provide a perspective outside
of the Frontpage users.

And about your top/bottom posting comment: I often wondered why certain
groups have gravitated to one or the other. I always try to "go with the
flow" of the newgroup I am in. Also what a net nanny and why are the bottom
posters ?

 

[Tom Pepper Willett]

I don't think it was Mo, it was Andreas who hit the nerve?

--
-----
Tom Pepper Willett
Microsoft MVP - FrontPage
http://www.microsoft.com/office/frontpage/prodinfo/default.mspx
To find the best Newsgroup for FrontPage support see:
http://www.net-sites.com/sitebuilder/newsgroups.asp
----
| Wow, looks like Mo hit a nerve. I didn't mean to provoke an argument. I
| don't think Mo implied there were not professionals here, just maybe
| suggesting that these other newsgroups would provide a perspective outside
| of the Frontpage users.
|
| And about your top/bottom posting comment: I often wondered why certain
| groups have gravitated to one or the other. I always try to "go with the
| flow" of the newgroup I am in. Also what a net nanny and why are the
bottom
| posters ?
|
| --
| John A
|
| Darryl Hannah wrote:
| > There are great web designers and more professionals hanging out here
| > than in your clique newsgroups. Take your bottom posting net nanny
| > attitude elsewhere. You don't belong here.
| >
| > ----- Andreas Prilop wrote: -----
| >
| >
| > > What do some of you more experienced web designers have to say
| > about the > W3C standards?
| >
| > I suggest to ask in <or
| > in <but not in a Microsoft proprietary newsgroup.
| >
| > --
| > Top posting.
| > What's the most irritating thing on Usenet?
|
|

 

[Brett...]

And about your top/bottom posting comment: I often wondered why
certain groups have gravitated to one or the other.

See:
http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html



--
Brett

I was going 70 miles an hour and got stopped by a cop who said, "Do
you know the speed limit is 55 miles per hour?" "Yes, officer, but I
wasn't going to be out that long..."

 

[Tom Pepper Willett]

In the Microsoft newsgroups, top posting is quite acceptable, and
encouraged. ;-)
--
-----
Tom Pepper Willett
Microsoft MVP - FrontPage
http://www.microsoft.com/office/frontpage/prodinfo/default.mspx
To find the best Newsgroup for FrontPage support see:
http://www.net-sites.com/sitebuilder/newsgroups.asp
----
| John A wrote:
| >>
| > And about your top/bottom posting comment: I often wondered why
| > certain groups have gravitated to one or the other.
|
| See:
| http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html
|
|
|
| --
| Brett
|
| I was going 70 miles an hour and got stopped by a cop who said, "Do
| you know the speed limit is 55 miles per hour?" "Yes, officer, but I
| wasn't going to be out that long..."
|
|

 

[Steve Easton]

Thank you Tom.
I have yet to figure out why people
think bottom posting is so great.!!
Why must I be forced to "re-read"
a post umpteen times, or be forced
to scroll down to see an answer.

 

[chris leeds]

ain't that bunk? I mean, artists don't treat each other like jerks because
one guy uses sable brushes and another uses synthetic. It's just a bunch of
junk when people act like jerks over what software someone chooses to use.
it's usually these uber-liberal types talking about equality and fairness
out one side of their face all the while being exclusionary from the other
side. Hypocrisy is the jerkiest of all jerky things. ;-)
/IMHO
PS I put up with this type of stuff from the political "clique" at my kid's
private school. I've learned to kind of like it though, sort of like
pushing on a loose tooth with your tongue: it doesn't feel good but you just
cant stop doing it.

John,

FYI: If you choose to post in those other groups and you want to get a
objective reply to your post, do not mention Microsoft or FrontPage.

--

==============================================
Thomas A. Rowe (Microsoft MVP - FrontPage)
WEBMASTER Resources(tm)

FrontPage Resources, Forums, WebCircle,
MS KB Quick Links, etc.
==============================================

 

[Joe Rohn]

I found it amusing that source had an anti-MS bias...perhaps one of the
perceived wrongs they felt about Outlook Express might carry a little more
weight if the page last updated on "10/26/98" was just a tad more current
LOL

--
Joe
Remove "AA" for email

FrontPage Users Forums at:
http://www.timeforweb.com/frontpage/