Tuesday, August 25, 2009Pragmatics vs Validation
Is code validation important in web design?
Something I've noticed recently which makes me wonder about people's understanding of how web design works is the designer/developer obsession with validation. I'm definitely not the first to realise this (i'm pretty sure i read an article not so long ago at jeffcroft.com - where Jeff made the same point), but i've been surfing the web a bit this weekend, and noticed how rampant this issue really is.
Validation of web sites is a good goal(a best practice), however it is not something that requires you to put a badge on your site.. or a link saying that you are CSS2.1 valid. Customers, clients etc don't care... they care about whether or not your web site works (preferably in all browsers).
Valid code is something all web designers ought to be producing, but you shouldn't put a badge up on the site.. it's like putting a badge that says "MY WEB SITE WORKS" - of course it does, the person reading your little badge is viewing the page. This site validated while I was building it, but i think now the CSS is technically invalid (i use the opacity: property a bit). But when a site i build is valid, I'm not screaming it from the rooftops, what if something I add breaks the validation later? Besides.. I take it as a given that a site I produce will validate (at least the XHTML - I sometimes use similar CSS hacks to save time.. shrug).
It comes down to a question of pragmatics. In any real world project there comes a time where you have to sacrifice what you KNOW is best in order to meet deadlines and budgets. This is how the world works, and as a freelancer it is painfully apparent. When I used to work in studios, for other people, I found i was a little more like the standard designer/ostrich - always sticking my head in the sand. Web sites serve a purpose, a client uses them to fulfil a business need, NOT to show off some application of technology.
View Printer Friendly Version
Email Article to Friend
Reader Comments (9)
mate i totally agree with you. most of the ppl that put their w3c valid badge on it are shit web designers fullstop. its a guide and if you had to follow it to a T then you'd lose alot of cool functionality that use css hacks.
good article, and love your site design too. nice angles!
Hey mate... Nice to see a shout from brissy.
Went and had a look at your site too, i really like it nice and professional, perfect for the area/work you do ;) and the backgrounds are cute.
Regarding CSS hacks.. you're right.. but at the same time, despite the agressiveness of my rant.. i suppose i think it's still a good idea to *think* about valid code... just not to make it your aim in life ;)
Hello Alex,
I have to disagree, from my experience with the company I currently work for, customer expectation and understanding of standards and validation is very much at the forefront of their requirements and minds. This is true for small startups all the way through to corporate businesses with which we deal with. To this end, we have experimented with 'badges of honor' and without, and there is a marked difference in how clients/customers communicate with us, therefor one can only assume that joe business is starting to expect certain standards from web/new media development firms and also rejecting/favour less, companies who don't promote such standards and values on their sites.
Regardless of personal taste stating that your business works to standards and validates the generated code doesn't hurt the potential customer, after all, within the food industry for example we expect food to taste good, yet this thought is reinforced/stated with the marketing and advertising materials.
As such, I don't believe that business are as shallow as to only care about the end product working. We would be fool hardy and silly to expect that from the very businesses that ultimately pay our wages and put food on our family tables.
Geoff
Hey Geoff.. I suppose maybe this would depend on the industry in question. I've not found a client outside the web industry who **actually** understands what it means to have a CSS2.1 Validated web site. Without a thorough understanding of web standards and web design in general I think you'll find that most clients are just regurgitating buzzwords. The cynic in me wants to say that Joe Business is usually just using terminology to make himself feel and look like he knows what he's talking about.
But what you've said kind of highlights what i'm getting at. Clients **shouldn't** care about valid code.. any more than when you get your appendix out you should care what kind of stitches the doctor uses to close up the wound.
As for your experience with and without badges (like i mentioned before, it would depend on the client's industry). But there are a LOT of successful online businesses out there that don't validate.
- amazon.com: Failed validation, 1684 Errors
- google.com: Failed validation, 62 Errors
- apple.com: Failed validation, 11 Errors
You get my drift.. I'm not suggesting that these guys are doing the right thing, only that it's obviously possible to succeed without writing valid code.
Of course I'm not suggesting that valid code is BAD.. only that touting it as a **feature** is a misguided application. In an ideal world, there would be no need to put a silly badge on a website, because all websites would already be valid.
Incidentally target isn't a valid attribute on an a tag in XHTML Strict ;) but despite the invalidity of your XHTML strict.. i must say.. i really love your personal site, really nice.
_target ... duh stupid cms, thanks for pointing that out ill get it fixed asap.
back to the post however, I appreciate that sites like google amazon etc have succeeded without valid code etc, however standards and validation do have their place.
Perhaps we should agree that both sides are the argument are equally valid and badges on websites are just a personal taste :)
Agreed.
I suppose i just don't want to see the industry get to a point in a few years where every client is demanding 100% validation even though it has no *real* play on whether or not a web site succeeds.
That's not to say I don't validate my code, i'm just taking a stand with regard to making validation a feature of the service that I offer. But i'm definitely happy to agree to disagree (it's lonely up here on my soapbox ;) )
Cheers for the debate Alex,
Ill be stopping by again soon for round 2 :) ding ding
Geoff, I also disagree with you. Alex is correct.
While you're at it you might as well post that your site was developed in PHP, MySQL, JavaScript, and all your code is perfect? Why not also post something saying all your images are optimized and your copy has been spell checked? Sounds ridiculous, right? That's because it is.
This all reminds me of the net in the 90's when everyone always put something like "Best viewed at 800x600 screen resolution in Internet Explorer with 256 colors and JavaScript enabled." Ridiculous, just like posting your site validates is.
Yes, the clients might care that their site validates, but it is not necessary to actually post this on a site as a typical USER does not care or even know what the hell it means.
Alex,
You pretty much took every word out of my mouth with this particular post.
I have seen far too many web designers parade it around like it is some kind of award.
Most of our clients are not designers they are business men/women, CEOs, VPs of Marketing, etc. and care far more about functionality and layout design then they do about a sticker.