Re: my new website - feedback required...



Owen mumbled the following on 15/07/2006 15:03:
"Stevie D" <stevie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:hdqhb212sf6krbe7tg1gkkgl0c1ug55oq5@xxxxxxxxxx
Owen wrote:

I listed a bunch of websites that don't validate. Yet, astonishingly, they
remain popular and clear successes.

And I'd bet that not one user has EVER complained about their HTML not validating.

<http://www.petitiononline.com/mkgoogle/petition.html>

I suggest you read Nielsen's article on why comparisons between major
players and start-up websites are pointless:
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20050725.html
::: Summary:
::: Many design elements work for Amazon.com mainly because of its status
::: as the world's largest and most established e-commerce site. Normal
::: sites should not copy Amazon's design.

Doesn't change the fact they were successful in spite of HTML not validating.

Only because at the time of their initial competition with others, none of the competitors validated either - they've outlasted and gained a higher market share in their respective fields, and in simple terms made it big.

Personal hobby sites, and sites for small clients haven't got that luxury, and as you later say, can't be compared/compete with large sites. They should validate to gain every ounce of an advantage as possible over other similar sites.

I read somewhere a long while ago that one reason for Google not including quotes on attribute values was *due* to their success, and the amount of data transfer that each and every character used when multiplied by the number of visitors per day. A small business or personal hobby website doesn't have that issue.

Ok, let's get some perspective. First of all, the site I posted about, is a personal hobby site. It is not a commercial venture. But even if it were, I would still be concerned about accessibility, and I would still NOT consider W3C to have anything to do with it.

So what does Google return for the phrase "web accessibility"?

I cite agian the examples of other sites which are perfectly accessible WITHOUT being W3C compliant.

What's your definition of "accessible"?

Given that most
online markets have now been filled, if not saturated, your site is
going to have to offer something extra to compete.

Compete with what? It's a personal hobby site.

You implied that work you do for other clients does also not necessarily validate either. Surely those sites are competing against other similar sites?


The best way to do that is to ensure that it works in _all_ browsing
situations, opening it up to the maximum number of potential visitors,
and also making it more popular with search engines.
The only way to do this is with clean, valid HTML code.

No, it's not the only way. In fact it makes very little difference. This may seem like plain ignorance or arrogance to you, but really, it's not. I have been authoring websites for several years, I used to spend ages ensuring my sites were W3C compliant after newsgroup posters moaned that they didn't validate.

Then I realised that my end users didn't actually care at all.

Who are your end users?


Have you EVER had feedback, or a guestbook entry from a visitor to one of your sites, where a user says "Your website sucks because the HTML doesn't validate"? Come on, be honest. EVER?

Nope, but then I don't use guestbooks and my websites validate anyway.

Your site isn't that good.

No, and I would never suggest my website was as successful as Google or Amazon. It's just a personal hobby site which I put online a couple of weeks ago. I'm not in competition with such sites.

So why use the concept that 'they don't validate, so I don't need to either'?

I would say, however, that my site is equally as accessible as either one of them.

To you maybe. How about to extreme cases of mentally and physically impaired blind users, using a pointing stick/voice navigation to use your website?

and how they appear with assistive technology?

maybe, but realisticly this doesn't matter in vast majority of cases.

Legally the DRC won't be looking at a majority of cases - just the one which breaks the DDA.

If by some wierd freak of nature, a client said, "ooh but your html doesn't validate", (which I suspect they never would say), I'd simply reply "Neither does Amazon.com".

But we've already established that your is a personal hobby site / small business sites, and therefore can't be compared to successful long-running sites like Amazon et al.

So let me get this straight. You actually had clients who insisted on the HTML validating? Or even clients who looked at the HTML code at all? Clients who ever heard of W3C?

I know nothing about plumbing either, but I'd expect them to use the right solder to join the pipes together in the right way, rather than using chewing gum and sellotape - that's why I'm paying them to be professional and do a good job. If they don't, then they don't get recommended for more work, and ultimately, they lose out. A small web design company should be thinking in the same way, especially as the competition is so high.

--
Gazza
Mobile Number Network Checker - http://mnnc.net/
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Validation of transfer of data files
    ... I need to validate that the ... Website access is just a different transfer ... >> when it was sent (i.e. that no corruption has occurred ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.work_remotely)
  • Re: my new website - feedback required...
    ... I've actually found a UK based newsgroup for website ... Or do you mean emailing for a username/password is a bad idea generally? ... I know the HTML doesn't validate and frankly I don't much care. ... have broken a broken link. ...
    (uk.net.web.authoring)
  • Re: Email addresss are not accepted
    ... they use to validate our address. ... But beware: check your system for spyware first. ... > When I access a website that asks for personal info- ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.inetexplorer.ie6.setup)
  • Re: Web Editing?
    ... >> The website at your email domain doesn't validate as any level of HTML. ... I may ignore the reply or reply to the original recipients. ...
    (freebsd-questions)
  • Re: How to clean install XP Home with Acronis True image 11
    ... I have successfully created a disk ... It appears to be a valid backup since I didn't ... about 20min to validate one file. ... successful, does that mean that a restore would be successful too? ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)