[Phpwm] [OT]event trigger
paul.matthews.86 at gmail.com
Thu Mar 15 12:10:33 GMT 2007
On 3/15/07, Phil Beynon <phil at infolinkelectronics.co.uk> wrote:
> > I always found it a bit weird that google.co.uk doesn't validate even
> > though having a validated site seems to get you higher in their
> > rankings. One of the tasks at the interview for my current job was to
> > recreate the google homepage but using validating XHTML and CSS. I was
> > asked afterwards why I thought Google don't fix the page so it
> > validates.
> I dont think much stuff actually does validate, and when customers are
> insisting on small budgets its not a huge consideration or one you will
> convince them of the benefits of easily.
> Whilst I did get my companie's site validating recently that was mainly
> an exercise - I know for a fact that the CMS manager I'm writing simply
> wouldnt get anywhere near validation. A later version might, but right now
> the key is to get some sales out there, get some cash in, and worry about
> validation a few versions later!
> What was the conclusion that you came to regarding why Google haven't
> bothered with validation?
> Phpwm mailing list
> Phpwm at mailman.lug.org.uk
I read a blog or something somewhere that said basically google ignore
validation because in essence they don't need to pay attention to it. I'm
sure they've got every different kind of browser available and they're
testing on all of them. Unfortunately Pale Purple doesn't have that sort of
time or resources to exhaustively test as much as google would. Therefore
standards are an aim for us (the web [application] developers) to adhere to
and similarly browsers too attempt the same (should they ever actually care
*cough* IE *cough*). As is the general consensus at the moment, they're not
definitive solution, however they're a good guide.
On the subject of BBC, I believe that their "listen now" or "listen again"
sources are .wma only which is hardly what I'd consider to be cross
More information about the Phpwm