Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary. Now with pictures!
- Posted on
January 26, 2004, 3:48 pm
rate this thread
Any ideas on how many U.S. sites are complient with web standards and are
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>
If the user resizes the screen the layout gets lopped off.
Any URL's would be helpful.
- Matthias Gutfeldt
January 26, 2004, 5:15 pm
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
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.