There are some errors on that page. 1) Self closing tags in HTML do not end in />. Only XHTML does. 2) Validation means you are using the correct syntax only and does not guarantee accessibility, usability or anything else. 3) Search engines do not give preference to validated pages though it may prevent them from getting tripped up by markup that doesn't make sense. 4) It mentions "overlapping elements" as a <div> contained in a <p> but not only shouldn't you do that, it's invalid anyway. If you validate, that will point out that error for you. 5) Validation is not hard if you validate early and often. Some people wait till their done to do that but by then they've dug a deep hole. In any case, I'll be first in line to point out when somebody's page doesn't validate.
a quick note: the css on that page has at least 6 errors, all of which i saw were instances of padding and margin written as .padding and .margin... ironic?
Very Wrong. Wrong. It's an OK article, but doesn't really get into the subtelties of semantics. Don't know what this post was for, I just like saying "wrong"
Damn, you guys are saving me the trouble of bashing it. <anti-dad> Now that your spirit is crushed, my job here is done</anti-dad>
Not to mention me, either. It's been a while since I've ripped bad advice to shreds and replaced it with facts.
how is it bad advice? usability and accessibilty are very important and if people with less knowledge are reading it, they might be swayed into thinking they need to push themselves more in this area.
Nobody said it was bad advice. Every one who posted in this thread always make sure their HTML and CSS are valid (and Deathshadow and Dan make their's so damn semantic and accessible). Only valid code has nothing to do with usabilty and little to do with accessibility. Remember, valid code does not mean good code. Valid code (in my opinion, and I think most people here will agree) means nothing if no semantic methods (for want of a better word) have been applied. There is little point validating if your code looks like: <div id="heading" class="heading1" style="border:none"> <div> <span style="font-size:142em" id="header_text">Heading</span> </div> </div> Code (markup): That validates strict, sure - but is the definition of crap code.
Another way to look at it is I can write the sentence "Car dog run hair" and a spell checker will "validate" it but, of course, the sentence makes no sense, contains no good information and is hardly usable. The same is true with validation.
It doesn't guarantee accessibility in itself, but valid markup is essential for passing W3C Priority 2 rules so can't be brushed aside.
Nowhere do I say validation should be brushed aside. In fact, I will be the first to jump on anyone's case for not validating their page.
Jump like a rabid squirrel who's gotten into the vat where they make Red Bull. : ) By the way, now I have to know, what's a divisive cottonwood? Is it related to the uniting cottonwoods?