Hello and welcome to our community! Is this your first visit?
Register
Enjoy an ad free experience by logging in. Not a member yet? Register.
Results 1 to 5 of 5
  1. #1
    New Coder
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Hatfield, England
    Posts
    28
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Post Big time Vs Small time

    Ok, so I'm a small time designer working on small time sites that might get 10000 hits a week. I try and make sure that my code it 100% valid and that my sites work across all the major browsers.

    Why is it, that the big time sites such as iGoogle, Facebook, even some pages on the BBC website have errors allover them.
    (I don't understand this one as I think their home page s one of the best around and it's 100% valid.)

    Should these super high traffic sites not set the standard for us to follow, rather than just showing contempt for the web standards?

    What are you're thoughts on this?

  • #2
    Senior Coder jerry62704's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Springfield, IL
    Posts
    1,100
    Thanks
    13
    Thanked 87 Times in 87 Posts
    Money. They have the choice (as we all do) of "guns or butter" and they put the money on the development of new stuff rather than devoting money (time is money) on fixing errors.

    You and me - we take over their IT departments and we will set them straight!
    .
    .
    ...and gladly would he learn and gladly teach

    Visit www.LiberalsWin.com for humor and the unique Bush/Obama Approval Polls

  • #3
    The Apostate Apostropartheid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    3,215
    Thanks
    16
    Thanked 265 Times in 263 Posts
    That's you and I, jerry. Grammar shall prevail. :P

    It really depends on the team they hire. These guys might just not care about web standards, and the employing company probably doesn't really know that area either--that's why they hired the team. Also, development costs do take effect: they would rather pay to add new things than revise old things, and if an obscure validation error comes up on a perfectly functional page, it's almost bound to be missed.

    Do love the BBC homepage, though.

  • #4
    Senior Coder jerry62704's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Springfield, IL
    Posts
    1,100
    Thanks
    13
    Thanked 87 Times in 87 Posts
    You and me, Cyan, will get the grammer right!

    And if I don't get the grammar correct, she will get me with a left, too.
    .
    .
    ...and gladly would he learn and gladly teach

    Visit www.LiberalsWin.com for humor and the unique Bush/Obama Approval Polls

  • #5
    Regular Coder
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    SE Wisconsin, US
    Posts
    222
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 20 Times in 20 Posts
    I have often wondered the same thing about validation on big name sites. One theory I used to believe but sort of question now if whether some amount of invalid markup improve cross-browser compatibility. Just a thought... not sure.
    Milwaukee Web Designer and SEO Milwaukee Firm specializing in ASP.Net, C#, VB.Net, SQL Server and Access.


  •  

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •