5 ms·
I've still yet to understand why people care so much about validation. We can barely get browsers to render things the same way, but we flip out because some fo
by bprater 18y ago
I've still yet to understand why people care so much about validation. We can barely get browsers to render things the same way, but we flip out because some folks don't close their tags.
I've never figured it out.
- sharkbrainguy 18y agoInvalid (x)html puts some browsers into a "quirks" mode, which makes it harder to get some things to work.
- eli 18y agoBut... the site does work, no?
- run4yourlives 18y agoNot always, no.
- randallsquared 18y agoIt would probably go farther toward validation if "<!DOCTYPE html>" was stuck on the top. :) And, since that's HTML 5, there are a lot of tags that don't need closing.
- fauigerzigerk 18y agoI'm far from being militant about it, but one reason for conforming to specs is that it makes writing browsers more productive. So the people writing browsers can create new features or make their code faster instead of trying to keep up with all kinds of quirks in everyday HTML. If one browser maker accepts a particular non-standard quirk, all others will have to follow. Sometimes this isn't a bad thing (XmlHTTPRequest) but it slows down browser development. Since browser makers can't keep up, web developers see browser incompatibilities and that makes them move to things like Fash/Flex. So basically, the effect is that the web becomes more proprietary the more non-standard quirks have to be supported. But still, there is clearly a tradeoff between conforming to standards, using what works to increase your own productivity, and experimenting with new things to innovate. It's not black and white in my view.