View Full Version : XHTML - If it doesn't validate is there a point in using it?

12-21-2002, 12:47 AM
I decided to do the project i'm playing with in XHTML transitional, however I have a couple of questions.

All pages are actually .asp does this make any difference? alot of dynamic sites seem to use <html> with no doc type declaration at all, is there a reason for this?

Also upon checking the first index.asp at the w3c validator I got many errors, If it doesn't validate should i still keep it XHTML ? I've checked many other big and small websites that use XHTML and half don't validate some with many errors also


12-21-2002, 01:22 AM
It can be hard to make a site validate. :) It takes a lot of hard work!

Using ASP will not matter at all, as the validator looks at the output.

A lot of sites are not at all bothered about being valid, and indeed you should decide whether or not it is important to you.

A lot of the things common in HTML 4.0 are gone in XHTML... well, they are still supported but they shouldn't be there, so they won't validate.

I have just recently launched a new site (www.soapi.com) which is valid XHTML, however it does take a while and sometimes there are silly things you forget (like, putting ALT attributes in images... I hate doing that but you will fail validation if you don't do it!)

Also I have had problems because I have only recently made the move to XHTML on a large scale (lots of sites to manage) and so I have a lot of stuff to update, bit by bit.

Sometimes you wonder why you bother... is it just to be able to display a little 'valid' icon? lol :) sometimes it seems pointless, however if your code is valid that speaks about your skills and also means it is more likely to be coded properly and work cross-browser.

I am sure someone round here has a link to a list of pointers etc. but I haven't got one, and although I had a quick look I couldn't find anything. (sorry!)

But at the end of it, it's up to you. It will still render even if it's invalid, most of the time.

::] krycek [::

12-21-2002, 01:26 AM
If it is still well-formed XML, then there are still advantages. If however, it doesn't pass the W3C validator because it isn't well-formed, then you aren't writing anything really.

Validation is nice, but not necessary for XML.

Just be keen to the differences between well-formed and valid.

12-21-2002, 07:38 AM
If you are really keen on Xhtml and don't want to do a lot of hard work to get it right get DW MX . [www.macromedia.com]

I have it and it works brilliantly for xhtml, it not only formats it but it will tell you what is wrong and why when validating.

12-21-2002, 08:49 AM

Interesting, I have used DWMX before but didn't know it could do this, out of the box or Some sort of plug in?

O.k I'm going to try and make them all valid, i started off with about 40 :eek: errors on my index but now it's down to 18

EDIT: its valid! :) ..well the index is anyway :D

turns out all i had to do for the 13 errors left was **** an opening form tag.

12-21-2002, 03:19 PM
No plugins. When you create a new document you have the option to make it XHTML compliant. You can also go to

File > Convert > Xhtml

To convert an existing document.

Grant Palin
12-21-2002, 06:50 PM
Javascript events (onBlur, onClick, onFocus, etc) should be lowercase in XHTML (onblur, onclick, onfocus, etc).

I know what you're going through...I recently converted my site to XHTML, and it was quite a bit of work to get all the pages to validate. One really nice thing about Dreamweaver is that it has a mass search and replace feature, so if you need to change the same thing on every page, just use Dreamweaver's search and replace function.