standards

Discussion in 'HTML' started by _ritter_, Jan 26, 2004.

  1. _ritter_

    _ritter_ Guest

    Two questions:
    Any ideas on how many U.S. sites are complient with web standards and are
    using CSS?

    And - if there is a push by state and federal agencies to make them
    compliment - why are other commercial sites and non-profit not joining in by
    remaking their sites?

    I have gone to a few non-profit sites and have found that their sites were -
    or are - still using tables for layout and not the <style> [form] / <body>
    [content] format.

    If the user resizes the screen the layout gets lopped off.

    Any URL's would be helpful.
    Thank you.
    TR
    _ritter_, Jan 26, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. _ritter_

    mark | r Guest

    its only law if you operate a venture where accessibility is a requirement
    of your bricks and mortar business...

    as for deadlines, i believe it was back in 1999!

    mark

    "_ritter_" <tony@gonefishing_NO_guideservice_SPAM_.com> wrote in message
    news:40156047$...
    > Two questions:
    > Any ideas on how many U.S. sites are complient with web standards and are
    > using CSS?
    >
    > And - if there is a push by state and federal agencies to make them
    > compliment - why are other commercial sites and non-profit not joining in

    by
    > remaking their sites?
    >
    > I have gone to a few non-profit sites and have found that their sites

    were -
    > or are - still using tables for layout and not the <style> [form] / <body>
    > [content] format.
    >
    > If the user resizes the screen the layout gets lopped off.
    >
    > Any URL's would be helpful.
    > Thank you.
    > TR
    >
    >
    mark | r, Jan 26, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. _ritter_ schrieb:
    >
    > Two questions:
    > Any ideas on how many U.S. sites are complient with web standards and are
    > using CSS?


    Two or three, give or take a few.


    > And - if there is a push by state and federal agencies to make them
    > compliment - why are other commercial sites and non-profit not joining in by
    > remaking their sites?


    a) It costs time, money, and effort
    b) The people in charge don't want to spend the time and the money or
    make the effort because they can't figure out the benefits.


    > Any URL's would be helpful.


    URLs about what, precisely?


    Matthias
    Matthias Gutfeldt, Jan 26, 2004
    #3
  4. In article <40156047$>,
    tony@gonefishing_NO_guideservice_SPAM_.com says...
    > Two questions:
    > Any ideas on how many U.S. sites are complient with web standards and are
    > using CSS?


    18.


    > And - if there is a push by state and federal agencies to make them
    > compliment - why are other commercial sites and non-profit not joining in by
    > remaking their sites?


    Cost. If it works, don't fix it.


    > I have gone to a few non-profit sites and have found that their sites were -
    > or are - still using tables for layout and not the <style> [form] / <body>
    > [content] format.


    Tut-tut.


    > If the user resizes the screen the layout gets lopped off.


    That isn't necessarily solved by converting to a CSS-based layout.

    --
    Hywel I do not eat quiche
    http://hyweljenkins.co.uk/
    http://hyweljenkins.co.uk/mfaq.php
    Hywel Jenkins, Jan 26, 2004
    #4
  5. _ritter_

    DU Guest

    _ritter_ wrote:
    > Two questions:
    > Any ideas on how many U.S. sites are complient with web standards and are
    > using CSS?
    >


    Sites using CSS might be as high as 50%, maybe more.
    Sites having valid (validated with W3C validator) markup code: maybe 2%.
    Sites with their CSS code valid: maybe 4%.
    Sites having valid markup code and valid CSS code: 1%. W3C estimate at
    1% too.

    > And - if there is a push by state and federal agencies to make them
    > compliment - why are other commercial sites and non-profit not joining in by
    > remaking their sites?
    >


    First of all, revamping and improving a whole site costs time and
    requires competent and skilled web developers. Who are site owners going
    to turn to? Normally, for such work, they would turn to their own
    website employees or website contractors but since the invalid site is
    what they produce to begin with, you can then draw 2 consequences from this:
    1- they do not have the skills to redesign and upgrade the site,
    otherwise they would have done so at their first trial. In most cases,
    their training was done with DreamWeaver 3 or DreamWeaver 4 and a few
    years of copy-N-paste done anywhere/everywhere and they were trained to
    do a quick job which looks good. They were not trained to do a good job
    based on solid understanding and grasp of concepts.

    2- they would themselves need to convince their website owners of the
    need to upgrade and improve the site. Since they don't have the
    competence, how could you expect them to document, to substantiate the
    need to upgrade the site? In a sense, you would expect them to explain
    to their bosses that they did a lousy job because they were incompetent.

    You may think I'm exaggerating here but I assure that the
    "if it looks good on this machine with this browser, then everything
    is/should be ok"
    is a powerful (and hard to combat) myth regarding the web. You can say
    that this is the Peters principle applied to the WYSIWYG feature.

    DU

    > I have gone to a few non-profit sites and have found that their sites were -
    > or are - still using tables for layout and not the <style> [form] / <body>
    > [content] format.
    >
    > If the user resizes the screen the layout gets lopped off.
    >
    > Any URL's would be helpful.
    > Thank you.
    > TR
    >
    >
    DU, Jan 28, 2004
    #5
  6. _ritter_

    Whitecrest Guest

    In article <bv9i37$coa$>,
    says...
    > > Two questions:
    > > Any ideas on how many U.S. sites are complient with web standards and are
    > > using CSS?

    > Sites using CSS might be as high as 50%, maybe more.
    > Sites having valid (validated with W3C validator) markup code: maybe 2%.
    > Sites with their CSS code valid: maybe 4%.
    > Sites having valid markup code and valid CSS code: 1%. W3C estimate at
    > 1% too.


    Based on these figures it appears that the "standards" and not really
    "standards"


    --
    Whitecrest Entertainment
    www.whitecrestent.com
    Whitecrest, Jan 29, 2004
    #6
  7. _ritter_

    DU Guest

    Whitecrest wrote:

    > In article <bv9i37$coa$>,
    > says...
    >
    >>>Two questions:
    >>>Any ideas on how many U.S. sites are complient with web standards and are
    >>>using CSS?

    >>
    >>Sites using CSS might be as high as 50%, maybe more.
    >>Sites having valid (validated with W3C validator) markup code: maybe 2%.
    >>Sites with their CSS code valid: maybe 4%.
    >>Sites having valid markup code and valid CSS code: 1%. W3C estimate at
    >>1% too.

    >
    >
    > Based on these figures it appears that the "standards" and not really
    > "standards"
    >
    >


    The only current, "de facto" standards which massively impose itselves
    are web developer incompetence and the generalization of WYSIWYG.

    DU
    DU, Jan 29, 2004
    #7
  8. _ritter_

    Whitecrest Guest

    In article <bvb9vo$qh9$>,
    says...
    > > Based on these figures it appears that the "standards" and not really
    > > "standards"

    > The only current, "de facto" standards which massively impose itselves
    > are web developer incompetence and the generalization of WYSIWYG.


    Yea, I guess what ever you want to believe...

    --
    Whitecrest Entertainment
    www.whitecrestent.com
    Whitecrest, Jan 29, 2004
    #8
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Jim Culver

    coding standards

    Jim Culver, Sep 9, 2003, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    2,211
  2. shbgupta

    coding standards

    shbgupta, Jun 27, 2003, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    542
    Chance Hopkins
    Jun 27, 2003
  3. Paul G
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    388
    John Timney \(Microsoft MVP\)
    Feb 26, 2004
  4. =?Utf-8?B?bWtsYXBw?=

    Evolving Web App Standards and ASP.NET

    =?Utf-8?B?bWtsYXBw?=, Jul 19, 2004, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    415
    Mr. Dot Net
    Jul 20, 2004
  5. SMG
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    306
Loading...

Share This Page