Social > General Discussion

W3C and You.

<< < (2/2)

Costa:

--- Quote from: ccbtimewiz on July 20, 2009, 02:54:45 PM ---Counter-argument:

http://www.webforefront.com/archives/2007/07/html_5.html

--- End quote ---

interesting...

SteveFJ:
I think we've already seen a counter argument set in place and operating as Internet Explorer. A browser that really didn't grasp the idea at all well. Not being compliant with W3C, it sent margins the wrong way, along with over 100 other "bugs". Just to set a margin, divs had to be placed inside divs causing additional layers, and perhaps go missing in some other browsers because of being too deep. Internet Explorer was a Web Designer's nightmare with workaround after workaround.
Internet Explorer 8 is more compliant with W3C and is much less of a nightmare.
Browsers are better understanding the same language when they conform to a standard to display things by. Of course they can only do that when the site designer conforms too, otherwise it can just be disorganised chaos.

I don't think there is any argument against really. It's a bit like saying this should be set in Russian for easier understanding of English.

ccbtimewiz:
Generally I'd agree with you on the standards, however not all software is compliant with the WC3.

It's unnecessary to become nitpicky or look down on people that have websites that aren't compliant. The only time that you should actually complain and/or report it to the webmaster is when the HTML code is so bad that the site layout is disconfigured to a point of being unable to navigate.

SteveFJ:
The point I'm trying to make in this topic is that when people conform their sites to W3C standards, they are much less likely to have issues either now or when they could become more obvious with upgrades and updates. I think it's something of particular benefit to people just starting out, so I'm not keen to complicate the issue.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page