Comments on: W3C Valid HTML ≠ Good HTML

By: Swedish fika » The Past and the Future of Swedish Fika

Swedish fika » The Past and the Future of Swedish Fika — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 00:00:52 +0000

[...] Our most popular post this year was 1. IE6, Let US Deal With All This Hate! 2. Need To Test Your Website In IE6 It’s Easy With IETester 3. W3C Valid HTML ≠ Good HTML [...]

By: Tommy

Tommy — Thu, 07 May 2009 22:35:07 +0000

to be honest… i’ve never validated any of my sites..

By: aobo711

aobo711 — Sat, 02 May 2009 14:05:03 +0000

i am bewildered by rendering a complicated treeview when thinking about a well-structure codes~

By: Derek

Derek — Fri, 01 May 2009 22:09:34 +0000

Amen. I’ve spent hours validating old code for my company, but it’s still the same ancient table layout.

The only positive aspect of validating poor code is making the browser work less to fix it. Otherwise, there’s not a whole lot of use in validating poor code.

By: Oscar Godson

Oscar Godson — Fri, 01 May 2009 20:25:18 +0000

You are 100% right. This is why I can’t stand CSS Frameworks and the like. They make you add tons of classes and extra spans to do what you could do with 1 CSS selector if you took about 5% more time.

i mean div class=”right w110 h500″ is completely counter what HTML is all about. It’s about the semantic markup and not about styles.

You have no idea how many sites I have worked on that have almost the same coding you had above as an example for the .

When will people learn :\

By: Per

Per — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 11:37:58 +0000

The semantic web will take over (X)HTML MOHA!