Hi folks I'm attempting to clean up the HTML code for an osCommerce template that I have constructed. My template simply overwrites the default installation of osCommerce. Running the out of the box osCommerce default installation through the W3C online HTML validator produces 12 HTML errors. When my template is uploaded and the same URL is run through the validator it produces about 40 errors. I've attempted to correct the errors but many of them state that code characters are missing when they actually exist. The template has been successful and is used by a number of ecommerce stores without any problems. So the question(s): How important is HTML validation and how difficult is it to achieve 100% compliancy? Thanx everyone
Ignore twisted's mentality... the very least is to analyse potential benefits vs workload for improving the site as needed. It's not as important as content, usability, accessibility and cross browser compatibility, but obviously, valid semantic code and other good aspects are best when they go hand in hand.
Wow you seem like a nice mature person. I was simply saying if it works fine and is selling then why bother? Why tinker with a perfectly fine engine? Hell look at google, amazon, ebay, quite a lot of sites out there that are massive don't validate, do you really think they care? Saves the hassle. I seem to remember someone telling me that 9 out of the 10 top sites in the world don't validate. Plus if it's not your code it makes it much harder to understand (well to me it does, others might be different, but I doubt it). Again it's just my opinion, so ignore it if you like.
Google doesn't validate to reduce bandwidth, e.g. <center> instead of <div ...>, maybe with CSS as well. Others don't because they made the mistake of not caring from the start and it is too late - note my mention of finding the balance between effort needed and the benefits of improving the site - e.g. extending its reach to minority groups, reducing load on the servers... Please don't say things like that, you come across as a sook. Find out the contextual definition of "mentality" and realise it wasn't an insult.
Hi twistedspikes and krt I just ran http://www.ebay.com through the W3C HTML validator and it produced this result: Failed validation, 181 Errors . . . I actually agree with both of your perspectives. It seems that 100% compliance is nearly unachievable. Fortunately my template does work quite well, with valid CSS and when I was constructing it, I paid particular attention to cross browser compatability. The reason for my concern at this stage is that with a number of templates in use and more being installed in the next while, I expect a small upsurge in sales from being able to show so many live examples.
The major sites that have poor validation results and inefficient interfaces are not proper examples. Sites such as eBay win by early market entry and their dominant user base that developed as a result of that. Sites such as eBay don't need to improve their sites because eBay is a household brand and people including myself put up with the under par interface, time spent to do basic tasks etc.
Hi krt I agree with what you are saying but the ultimate question still remains in how important is it? You've mentioned earlier the importance of considering time invested versus net gain but where I have a problem is in determining what these values are? I'm finding the exercise frustrating because I am unable to correct many of the errors that the validation script is suggesting exist. Where I want to correct these issues will the headaches be worth it? Especially when it is considered how well the template is performing as it is.
I mentioned a number of good points in the first post, and tried to pick the ones that go well with valid code. Anyway, I am assuming your site is what I call "loosely valid" which is fine, if there are a few errors and they are causing worse problems with browser rendering engines or require a lot of re-coding, then I wouldn't bother. So the important thing is to consider how well your site is performing as it is and how it could be and from the looks of it, ironing out the last few small issues are not worth it if they are causing headaches. Besides, for most sites, the only practical way to ensure everything remains 100% valid without an overboard workload is to use template driven HTML generation from a data store, e.g. through XSLT.