W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > September 2002

Re: justification for producing valid [X]HTML?

From: Dominique HazaŽl-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
Date: 16 Sep 2002 09:57:08 +0200
To: James Ralston <qralston+ml.www-validator@andrew.cmu.edu>
Cc: www-validator@w3.org
Message-Id: <1032163033.1631.101.camel@stratustier>
Le ven 13/09/2002 ŗ 22:19, James Ralston a ťcrit :
> I'm trying to make a justification to management why our organization
> should care about producing valid [X]HTML.
> 
> The current attitude is:
> 
>     1.  We design our documents for a consistent "look and feel"
>         (using mostly WYSIWYG HTML editors).
> 
>     2.  Our documents render "properly" in Netscape/Mozilla/IE.
> 
>     3.  Why bother to take the extra time to produce valid HTML when
>         the "invalid" HTML works just fine?
> 
> I'm sure people have written documents to refute these types of
> attitudes.  Unfortunately, I'm having very little luck in performing
> web searches for such documents, because the phrase "valid HTML"
> appears on about a billion web pages.

You can have a look at the following articles:
- "My site is standard! And yours?"
http://www.w3.org/QA/2002/04/Web-Quality.html
- "Buy standard compliant Web sites"
http://www.w3.org/QA/2002/07/WebAgency-Requirements
- "Liberty! Equality! Validity!"
http://devedge.netscape.com/viewsource/2001/validate/
- "HTML Standard compliance- Why bother?"
http://wdvl.com/Authoring/HTML/Standards/

There are many many more resources on the topic. You'll probably get the
best answers by searching in the archives of the public mailing list
public-evangelist@w3.org at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-evangelist/ or by asking your
question on this mailing list.

Regards,

Dom
-- 
Dominique HazaŽl-Massieux - http://www.w3.org/People/Dom/
W3C/INRIA
mailto:dom@w3.org

Received on Monday, 16 September 2002 03:57:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 25 April 2012 12:14:04 GMT