www.webdeveloper.com
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 21 of 21

Thread: Closing tags in HTML vs. XHTML

  1. #16
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Gold Coast (MS)
    Posts
    2,207
    Quote Originally Posted by aj_nsc View Post
    That's the problem with people's thoughts on the validator in my opinion. That coders who don't validate are "lazy" implying that validation is something to be strived for by efficient and good coders.

    This is simply not true. I don't run my code through the validator, which takes about 30 seconds, yet I do run it through at least 6 different browsers/browser versions to make sure that it renders and works correctly in all of them

    Which of those two things takes more time? Which of those two things makes more of a difference in the experience of the users who use my site?
    I do both. The 30-sec one for a quick check and through the browsers. When the code has validated, I usually don't have that much trouble with browsers except for the additional tweaks that may be needed. Takes a lot less time when you don't have to make coding corrections when the browsers don't show the layout you want. You never know if that is a problem with the coding you did or just the browsers. If you use the 30 seconds to check and eliminate the coding "problems", then you can get on with what you need to do. It doesn't take that long.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    3,346
    Quote Originally Posted by burnme View Post
    I'm sorry dude, but that made me laugh, I mean literally LOL. I know you are familiar with life cycles, it does say bs cs under your name. Why kid people, if your site doesn't update and change, at least yearly, at which time you address what you would like and don't like, then your site is dead and you probably don't need one. Come on, if you do this for a living you aren't hacking, your functioning. There is such a HUGE difference from academia and industry. When I program an application, that is when you have to make it work for 5 years, not a web page. On the web if you aren't changing, then your stale. Where in the world do you think php, asp, ruby, java, and every other dynamic language came from. If there wasn't a need to be constantly updating, then we would all just be using notepad and basic tags. The change from IE6 to 7 was 5.5 years, if your site didn't change or get updated in that time, you aren't programming, your a script kiddie.
    That is all great and fine when you are in a fast industry or a fledgling company...but when you are working on Enterprise level sometimes you get stuck with the same thing for 10 or more years and no approval or budget to make any fixes even if the infrastructure of your workforce changes. Especially when you are looking at internal sites and applications it is not often thought of as a priority like an externally facing site would be. If you are constantly changing your site either you have an externally facing site that has a large budget...or perhaps you are merely dabbling, hm?

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dark Side of the Moon
    Posts
    70
    Quote Originally Posted by criterion9 View Post
    That is all great and fine when you are in a fast industry or a fledgling company...but when you are working on Enterprise level sometimes you get stuck with the same thing for 10 or more years and no approval or budget to make any fixes even if the infrastructure of your workforce changes. Especially when you are looking at internal sites and applications it is not often thought of as a priority like an externally facing site would be. If you are constantly changing your site either you have an externally facing site that has a large budget...or perhaps you are merely dabbling, hm?
    Dude you are a comedian.... I love it. What enterprise level development are you doing where you aren't asked on an almost daily basis to change this and fix that? I have worked for everyone from Verizon to Siemens, and if you aren't producing, you are fired. The boss, they aren't programmers, they are bean counters, and micro-managers, looking to squeeze another dollar out of what little the even less technical think they should work with. 95% of everything you do is a throwing together this piece and that piece, and in the end you end up with with a piece of crap, BUT on the enterprise level, it works, and if it works, the next problem is ready. The boss doesn't want to hear, I can't release that cause it's not compliant, they want to hear it's ready, has been ready, and I was waiting for you to give the go ahead. So if want to call that dabbling, then I have to question your credentials, you either teach programming, or you don't work in an environment where what you make, makes the difference in the bottom line or operation.
    I love how people get an attitude when THEY asked for help.

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    3,346
    Quote Originally Posted by burnme View Post
    Dude you are a comedian.... I love it. What enterprise level development are you doing where you aren't asked on an almost daily basis to change this and fix that? I have worked for everyone from Verizon to Siemens, and if you aren't producing, you are fired. The boss, they aren't programmers, they are bean counters, and micro-managers, looking to squeeze another dollar out of what little the even less technical think they should work with. 95% of everything you do is a throwing together this piece and that piece, and in the end you end up with with a piece of crap, BUT on the enterprise level, it works, and if it works, the next problem is ready. The boss doesn't want to hear, I can't release that cause it's not compliant, they want to hear it's ready, has been ready, and I was waiting for you to give the go ahead. So if want to call that dabbling, then I have to question your credentials, you either teach programming, or you don't work in an environment where what you make, makes the difference in the bottom line or operation.
    Or perhaps...the client-side coding is all done on a one-off basis through a cms and all the meat (features) are done over longer periods (with proper planning time and everything, shocking I know). I have worked at places that tried to rush actual features in all the time, but that usually ends in disaster and more work effort in the end.

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    409
    Quote Originally Posted by burnme View Post
    ... if your site doesn't update and change, at least yearly, at which time you address what you would like and don't like, then your site is dead and you probably don't need one...
    If you have a *small* website, sure, you can re-skin it every year if you want. If you have even a medium (1000+ assets) or a large (10,000+ assets) website, there are areas of the site that you will never get a chance to re-skin or re-design.

    My personal website, sure, I can update it with a new flavor every month.

    There is a difference between updating a website and updating the templates that a website is based on, consolidating/fixing/updating CSS files, etc.

    The last 3 corporate sites I've worked on contain *10s of thousands* of web assets developed by different marketing teams for different purposes etc.

    Based on the size and complexity of the sites, when you build out a section of the site you have to anticipate that it will not be "re-opened" ever again and that all updates to that section will be simply adding/removing content in existing pages and using existing pages as templates for new pages for that section of the site. You have to expect that you will not have funding to make updates to the HTML/CSS.

    The best way to achieve long term viability - robust cross-browser testing and standards compliant code. If you build something that looks good and functions properly in the latest version of each major browser and your code is "as compliant as it can be" to achieve this result, your pages will last longer than if you do only "cross-browser" or "compliant".

    Fr the most part, if your HTML and CSS play are compliant with your declared DOCTYPE, and your site works in the latest versions of the major browsers, you can reasonably presume that newer versions of the same browsers will continue to "play nicely" with your HTML, CSS, and DOCTYPE.

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dark Side of the Moon
    Posts
    70
    *yawn*
    I love how people get an attitude when THEY asked for help.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
HTML5 Development Center



Recent Articles