To Validate, or NOT to Validate, that is the question.

Bought a toaster once because it would look good on my kitchen counter and could cook up to 4 slices of bread. I like my toast dark, but unfortunately, this toaster, when fully loaded, could only go to medium dark and only then if you only put 2 slices in at a time. It just so happened that a Consumer Reports article I stumbled on pointed that out - a bit too late for me.

When my washing machine broke a while back, my neighbor let me use hers. It was one of them really cool looking ones, in a deep blue, that also stacked the dryer. I don't like ironing, so I'm careful how I do my laundry so's it don't get too wrinkly, but that damn machine got my clothes so wrapped around the agitator and twisted up like a rubber band, I had to iron ever'thing. She told me it worked fine for her, but I also noticed she had an ironing board set up for easy access too.

A long time ago, I took a brand new car for a test drive. Man, she was a beauty, perfect color, comfortable seats, nice sounds, I figgered I could drive this for hours and enjoy ever' minute. After looking it over real good, I noticed a number of little dings that had been touched up, the shift indicator didn't quite position right on the gear I was in and there was a small tear in the trunk upholstery. The dealer said the nicks were common and they always include a touch-up kit with the car, the shift indicator was fine, I just didn't put it in the right place and would get used to the feel of it later. Then he said the tear in the upholstery shouldn't be a concern because it was, after all, in the trunk and was very small anyway.

I still liked the car 'cause it was pretty cool looking, so I got it. Turns out, over time, there were some mechanical problems that shoulda never happened and made my over all cost of the car, for fixing problems that were contributed to by some of these "small problems" very high. A couple years later I sold the damn thing for a lot less than I thought I shoulda got. Oh wait, then I find out the car pretty much explodes if it gets hit the wrong way in an accident.

Of course I know these are extreme examples and you prob'ly think not even relative to styles and modifications for your forum. But just how many of you are quick to complain about Microsoft and other software companies because their products don't work. Well, in fact, they do work, but you think the handful of problems and bugs they keep finding solutions to ain't good enough for your discerning tastes. So, you use Firefox, Thunderbird, Linux and anything else that ain't Microsoft. You lament and cajole every other poorly functioning software too - stuff that for a great majority of users seems to be fine. Yet you ignore the glaring issues with FF, TB and Linux and consider yourself in the elite because you have learned to ignore serious problems because they are free, pretty and different - and not Microsoft.

You have been lulled into believing that bad code is okay code. You think because it looks good, it must be good. You think because it was designed by a girl with nice lips or a guy with a gift for gab, it has to be great product. You don't realize you've been sold a product with a few dings, causes a wrinkle now and then and might even blow up on you with the slightest provocation.

When someone like me, who's old enough to know what getting ripped off is really all about, comes along and points out there's a few problems with the code, some of you get all up in arms because these issues are of no concern. We hear a box full of excuses from the designers and salesmen that do their best to minimize the issues. Sometimes they aren't even that subtle:
Please show me were I said they were valid?
And the work they put into proving they are right even when they are wrong:
I didn't claim them to be valid. Most skins on the market don't pass validation. Those that do pass, are typically no more than the default vbulletin theme, with slight changes made.

Oh, look there, vbulletin-faq itself has 222 errors :D

Even if the style is completely valid, with all the modifications that are available, chances are, it wouldn't be valid for long.
And Jim, although your forum and thread list are valid... once you go beyond that into the post they are not. ... Those that download free styles (or paid for that matter) are going to change them to their needs, so had it been valid in the first place, chances are they won't be for long.
So you see, it's not their fault, it's vBulletin-FAQ's fault, or your member's fault, or your fault because you will do something to screw up the works.

BULL! You've been sold a load of crap all designed to make you believe sloppy code habits are the norm or inevitable. It's because the designers and coders are too damn lazy to make a few code checks in the W3 Validator. It's nothing but pretty, in many cases, and at some point, will create or exacerbate more problems when you try to add a new modification or fix some mysterious problem.

How many of you have seen (or had your own) problems posted here or other support sites trying to get some issue fixed? Something doesn't line up, doesn't function like you thought it would or just plain goes blank - the area you're working on or the whole damn page. Sometimes you end up blaming the problem on the new modification and just discard it. Others will work far too long, only to find the real culprit was a missing or errant piece of code you have no idea of how it got there. Very few of you place the blame where it belongs: the poor coding habits and defiant attitude of the designer.

Oh, but it's me with the attitude:
Jim get off it already! I don't see the point in anyone running around pointing out other people's errors if it's not effecting the final outcome
...it's pretty clear that although you [want] people to think you are offering them advice, when what you are really doing is trying to prove to yourself that you're a know it all. I don't think there has been a positive post made by you without a hint of "Look dumbass, I'm right, your wrong" in it.
Full disclosure. Ever hear of that? It means if something is wrong with the product you are about to obtain, you should know any of the inherent problems it might have. In some businesses, it's the law. Not software, of course, or Microsoft and every style and mod designer here would be out of business. Not that anyone here is making any great dough... Oh wait, there are some designers here making some loose change. One gets $280.00 for a style full of errors, several others get anywhere from 10.00 to 39.00 per, errors and all. Yes, some, many in fact, are free (except for the branding option). But absolutely nothing excuses the fact that the product has been produced with only aesthetics in mind. The code it's built with is of little or no concern to the designer and they don't care if you have to jump through hoops to find a seemingly unrelated problems with your forum.

Even if the code does not contribute to the problems you might have, validating the code will make it so much easier to track down the real problems you have on your site. It's time you made the designers and coders show some responsibility. I have tried a number of different methods to alert the designer to code problems. But coders usually don't like it no matter how you say it and will turn the reporting of usually easily fixed errors into a personal attack - like I am attacking them.

I tried to help a member sort through a few problems just recently. He ignored me. Said he was interested in finding solutions, even offered to pay someone. But when I offered to help for free, I never heard from the guy again. It is beyond me why anyone would feel threatened by the report of code problems. These same people would NOT leave the house in a wrinkled blouse, would be upset if their toast weren't cooked right and would be quick to sue the manufacturer if their car was found to be dangerous, even though it was a great looking car. But point out an error they may have and I am the bad guy.

Look, I've said this before and I will keep saying it: vBulletin is valid code right out of the box. You have to do something wrong to break the validation. It's not my fault, it's not the member's fault, it's not vB-FAQ's fault or anyone else's. It's the fault and responsibility of the designer and coder. If they can't fix the problems, there are plenty of people that will offer their help for free. Because what people get should work, not just look pretty.
hmm, maybe I grabbed the wrong zip :o but I don't think so.

I'll check it out and update asap

thanks for letting me know Jim.
I'll get the style with the side column validated asap.. I forgot we had only cleaned up the wide one :p

Thanks for reminding me. :)
People like that are the ones you should be looking to for quality and the desire to give you everything you deserve. There's more of them around, keep looking. I know I will.

Good lord, im not reading all that. Answer is if it looks good and works, fine with me.

THANK YOU... for finally posting your code rants in an appropriate thread, rather than running all over the forum with it. :)

Jim,

The rant is cute and makes some very valid points but it's seems that you are incapable of understanding that most people plain just don't care. If it works and looks good, they're happy with it. In reality you and I both know that a few or even 100 validation "errors" are highly unlikely to break a page or entire style. As I said before browsers and search spiders compensate for bad code. Heck the biggest browser out there, Internet Explorer does not render pages to validation spec and because of IE playing by it's own rules many sites need additional style sheets or additional coding to compensate for IE's rendering errors. Go pound on Microsoft's door about following specs.. Who's homepage has 31 errors, BTW.

Google.com has 36 errors
Yahoo.com has 34 errors
AOL.com has 600 errors
NYTimes.com has 331 errors

Wow, validation really counts.. These are all huge web companies with humongous websites that have college educated developers working 24/7 on them.. They obviously don't care much about validation standards yet are hugely successful and popular. I guess that makes validation not worth much more than that little button with a link back to w3c.

The bottom line is I've never seen not one vBulletin template developer ever once credit themselves with outputting 100% validated code and I don't have an issue with it.

You have to think.. For free skin developers it doesn't pay to waste time hunting down little bugs in the template. If the developer is lucky all he will get back is a back link in exchange for his work.. which is really nothing.

To chase a developer around saying this skin has XXX amount of errors as do all your other ones released here, is insulting to say the least and makes the developer feel unwelcome. If you want to use his skin, download it and fix the errors on your site.. Maybe you could be a nice guy and email it back to him with fully validated code.

As for paid skins.. It's your money do what you want. If you order a skin from say Peggy and tell her you want a 100% validated skin from the get-go.. From there she can either accommodate you or tell you to go elsewhere.

To drag highly respected template developers like Miner name through the mud over a transaction you had nothing to do with and over a "full disclosure" BS argument is quite frankly insulting.

Full disclosure are you kidding me? If Chevy advertised it's car as the best car on earth but said Cadillac really has a better engine.. How many cars do you think Chevy would sell?

You want a fully validated template, fine built it yourself or higher someone who will accommodate you.. Don't chase people around saying their templates have this many errors or tell other webmasters their forum has XX errors then beating them over the head with it..It just makes vB-FAQ feel unwelcoming and like open season on newbies. Teach, don't bash.. Don't offer advice unless it's asked for.

Good lord, im not reading all that. Answer is if it looks good and works, fine with me.
It's an article posted for the benefit of your customers who very well MAY read it. Perhaps you should take the time, when you have it.

THANK YOU... for finally posting your code rants in an appropriate thread, rather than running all over the forum with it. :)
I am sorry you feel my few posts about errant code are rants, although it doesn't surprise me since you are one who has taken much pride in your work. But when someone points out your mistakes, it pisses you off. I don't see you or these other coders in support sites asking for help with bad code though.

Contrary to what one member suggested, I DON'T know it all. But you don't have to be a good cook to know when something leaves a bad taste in your mouth. It just amazes me that so many coders lay a pretty neat table, but it just ain't palatable.

Oh well, good enough for who it's for. Is that the attitude we should take? I don't. When designers and coders exhibit a desire to do better and produce quality product, then I don't have to let them know they've made a mistake.

If great looks and a good meal were all that were necessary, I'd still be with the psycho I lived with last year.

Jim

No Jim, I don't get pissed off when someone points out my mistakes. I'm far from perfect and am still learning, just as we ALL are. And actually, I have been looking at the code in my styles since you said something, even tho there are very few since my themes are css based, using the default style as a base to start.

But when everyone sees you running around pointing out invalid code for days, they stop listening and start shutting you out. You've shoved it down our throats long enough hun. It's getting tiresome.

What a huge bunch of excuses you got there, Dan. It's sickening. Those sites you mentioned were coded over years, one mistake over another and started broke to begin with. vBulletin is valid code. You HAVE to do something wrong to break it. You go ahead and make every excuse in the world to justify it. DON'T, by all means, encourage new people to coding to become better and have values and take real pride in the work they do. God knows we all need more broken sites out there.

You sound as if quantity is more important than quality. That's a real fine standard to encourage.

This is a support site to help people with problems they're having with their forums. Part of the problem is the sloppy code designers are encouraged by people like you to put out. It's shameful. Clean code is NOT that difficult.

And Peggy, acknowledging code problems and making efforts publicly to clean it up will also encourage others to do the same and leaves me with not much to say. But when someone posts bad code and no one tells them about it, it causes problems for everyone. The guy (me) who even mentions it is attacked simply because I mentioned a problem.

If all you see me do is rant and rave about coding issues, then you're blind. Because it happens to be a sensitive issue with someone, particularly the bad coder, it becomes this huge deal that you are compelled to shut me up over.

Jim

There's nothing wrong with telling them about bad code Jim. I'm just saying you're beginning to sound like a broken record. We've read and read and read, for days now. Youv'e gotten your message across loud and clear. Enough already.

You're actually beginning to turn people off now, rather than helping.

Bah! That's why I call you the Code Nazi. You simply cannot help yourself from chasing designers around in threads making them feel 2" tall because you don't like that they're code doesn't validate. You cannot help going to someones site who has posted here with an issue unrelated to template coding and telling them your site has XXX errors. When someone calls you out on it, you go on the attack like people are attacking you instead of maybe stepping back and heeding the advice.

You cite nothing but principal as to why sites should validate, yet you cannot provide one solid concrete reason as to why they have to validate. The most popular sites in the world don't worry about validation.. why should I? Who gave you the right and the self appointed duty persecute designers who post at FAQ without 100% validated code???

What you call excuses I call real world facts. No one cares about validation. In fact off the top of my head I can only think of one web designer (not vB designer) who cites 100% valid code as a feature.. Does it bring them more work? I don't know, don't care because I don't care about valid code. As long as it renders properly across the most popular browsers, I'm happy.

It's actually laughable that I'm sitting here arguing about this.. Normally I'd just let it roll off my back but your incessant triads about unvalidated code is sickening and very unwelcoming to this forum.

You can stay by FAQ's virtual door all you want and act like a rabid pit bull biting people's heads' off because you don't like how their site is coded. I won't be a part of it, I don't like your arrogant attitude and the bashing (for no reason mind you) and won't subject myself to the BS. There are plenty of other webmaster help sites out there where a couple of members who scream and bash the most aren't allowed to rule the roost.

You can call me names, Dan, but I do here what others have done for me over the years - help me make better decisions and be a better webmaster and coder. No, I don't design styles or modifications for vBulletin, but I do know enough to help out once in a while. I've been in the Internet support forum scene for about 15 years and, as I have said before, I try to give away what I got. You can take what you like and leave the rest.

When you and Peggy implied that all I do here is complain about code and disrupt design release and modifications threads, I had to take a look for myself. I was beginning to think I just might be the terrible person you want me to be. Here's a short list, not complete, but just stuff I've done over the last 2 weeks or so:

http://www.vbulletin-faq.com/forum/showthread.php?p=65760#post65760 (questions and comments about Analytics)
http://www.vbulletin-faq.com/forum/showthread.php?p=65770#post65770 (help someone find help with vBSEO)
http://www.vbulletin-faq.com/forum/showthread.php?p=65782#post65782 (help someone find a hack)
http://www.vbulletin-faq.com/forum/showthread.php?p=65798#post65798 (giving css help)
http://www.vbulletin-faq.com/forum/showthread.php?p=65907#post65907 (offering management advice)
http://www.vbulletin-faq.com/forum/showthread.php?p=65937#post65937 (me answering a n00b question that turns out wasn't)
http://www.vbulletin-faq.com/forum/showthread.php?p=65951#post65951 (me asking a n00b question)
http://www.vbulletin-faq.com/forum/showthread.php?p=66184#post66184 (help someone locate a template)
http://www.vbulletin-faq.com/forum/showthread.php?p=66226#post66226 (answer about vB license URL requirement)
http://www.vbulletin-faq.com/forum/showthread.php?p=66231#post66231 (css help sites)
http://www.vbulletin-faq.com/forum/showthread.php?p=66246#post66246 (graphics help sites
http://www.vbulletin-faq.com/forum/showthread.php?p=66243#post66243 (html code help sites)
http://www.vbulletin-faq.com/forum/showthread.php?p=66289#post66289 (pirated software opinion)
http://www.vbulletin-faq.com/forum/showthread.php?p=66273#post66273 (email confirmation box clarification)
http://www.vbulletin-faq.com/forum/showthread.php?p=66355#post66355 (html in messages warning)
http://www.vbulletin-faq.com/forum/showthread.php?p=66402#post66402 (drop-down menus help)
http://www.vbulletin-faq.com/forum/showthread.php?p=66410#post66410 (adding smilies)
http://www.vbulletin-faq.com/forum/showthread.php?p=66230#post66230 (my take on problem members)
http://www.vbulletin-faq.com/forum/showthread.php?p=66489#post66489 (my opinion on auto-poster software)

Interspersed in there were 3 or 4 very short messages alerting the designer of errors in their code, which I think should be important to them - and to those who consider using the styles. A couple weeks ago I tried to help a guy having problems with an advertising module (http://www.vbulletin-faq.com/forum/showthread.php?p=65856#post65856 ). I pointed out errors, but placed no blame and tried to be diplomatic and helpful at the same time. The guy said I ranted and raved because, I guess, I didn't post in 20 words or less.

Some poor guy here got ripped of by one of your favorite designers (http://www.vbulletin-faq.com/forum/showthread.php?p=65704#post65704 ). He was charged 250 bucks for a broken product, which most people would be upset about. But not here. He's an advertiser and his style looks pretty, so it's me that's the bad guy, not him for taking some poor saps money and gives him crap. Reminds me of my drug addled days on the street when I was pissed about a bad bag of dope. But no one wanted me to confront the dealer because he was the only one who gave credit. All of a sudden I'm the bad guy, even though he ripped me and everyone else off with crap that barely gave you a buzz. As long as we could get by until the next fix, it was okay.

I tried to help a staffer reduce errors he complained about. He said he even tried to hire someone to take care of it. I helped with 6 or 10 of the errors and wanted to help more - free and in a way everyone could benefit (http://www.vbulletin-faq.com/forum/showthread.php?p=65906#post65906 ), but nothing more was said.

They should be more like Dan here. Just say you don't give a damn. That's honest. But why you try to convince others they shouldn't strive for quality and better values is beyond me. If vBulletin-FAQ is the great place you say it is - and I think it has potential to be - then these kinds of topics should be explored more, not attacked and belittled. Show the members and even the designers that you really do want to help and will give them a place and a voice to do just that. Don't shove problems under the rug and try to shut people up that want to pull the rug back to clean.

Jim

He was charged 250 bucks for a broken product, which most people would be upset about.
Jim, the bottom line to this entire discussion is your insistent position that this product was 'broken'. But tell me this - was the product really 'broken', or did it contain some errors? If the style was truly broken, then that would mean it would not display.

I really have to believe that if a customer approaches a designer to purchase a style, he has a wonderful opportunity to ask if the style will validate. And I believe those individuals who find those to be important standards will ask the questions. If they do not care, they won't ask.

Now if you know a designer billing their work as being 100% and it isn't, then you've got somebody trying to sell a lemon and that is not right.

We both know the correct code for a line break, but when it comes right down to it, without verifying every Web page you visit, how are you ever going to know if the code uses <br> or <br />? I know it has to really knot your knickers to admit it, but good, old <br> works every time, doesn't it? It won't validate, but it still gets the job done and you cannot deny it.

Why should I hire a floor-covering professional to do the work on my floors? I've got a couple of buddies that will do the same work for a case of beer. What's that you say? The professional may cost more money, but he'll do a better job? Yes, I have to admit that is most likely correct.

How much money is Mark charging for the styles he's released here? How much is Peggy charging for her holiday style?

It's pretty difficult to demand perfection when you're not paying for perfection.

Jim,

You, I, and anyone else on FAQ can have a rational discussion/debate here. There is no need to go hounding around other threads like a rabid dog. Then go on the defensive the second someone even a moderator says pipe down a bit we're not talking about code validation. I do apologize for getting my proverbial knickers in a bunch and calling you a code Nazi..but that is how you come off at times. I'm sure I come off like a big jerk at times too although I try and rephrase or edit something before I post something that could hurt someone.

As for Scott X, who was supposedly "ripped off" by Miner.. He's been making changes since day one. I know this because he thought I was free tech support for him and foolishly I did make a couple of edits for him free of charge. While I don't doubt that the style was delivered with some validation issues, I wouldn't doubt that a majority of them were cause by a newbie who doesn't know any better making his own template edits.

No one was ripped off! Miner never guaranteed delivery of a 100% validated template and Scott accepted the work as complete when Miner delivered it because it displayed correctly. If Scott had done a little research wanted a 100% validated template for what ever reason, he could've requested it up front or refused delivery from Mine.

Validation is just pointless all Validation does is validate that you know how to write strict code. I just don't, cannot, and never will understand the need to bash someone who got a style either a) cheap ($250) or b) Scott free.

I don't have the energy to argue or "debate" this topic, but I do have one last thing to add.

As mentioned above, I'm not charging anything for these styles. And, when someone has problems, I try and fully support those "free" styles I release. Part of the development of mods and free styles is, the people in the forums help one another to make it better. I pointed out the fact that I thought your intention was to help, but it was the constant persistence you have of pointing out ones mistakes.

I completely understand your points with validation. I have read up on reasons to validate... cross browser compatibility, better indexing in the search engines, etc, etc..
and yes, truth be told, I could have very well gone through every style and validated it, but unfortunately, I don't have the free time to offer that right now being a father of 4, married, with a job... I'm offering these for nothing, offering my support for nothing, and I'm relying on member feedback to improve the styles.

I can see your points regarding disclosure and validation for products that are marketed as such, and everyone above has kinda covered my sentiment on this. Bottom line is, when you are posting at a forum, there is not tone, pitch, expression to tell the reader of your posts that you are trying to help. Your style and history of posting is that of one who is nagging, bragging of your "excellence in coding", quick to point out what others are doing wrong... I'm happy to see I'm not the only one that noticed.

Jim, the bottom line to this entire discussion is your insistent position that this product was 'broken'. But tell me this - was the product really 'broken', or did it contain some errors? If the style was truly broken, then that would mean it would not display.
Lots of products look good and seem to work well, but somewhere down the line it either fails too soon or some other product it should work with doesn't because of the errors left in the original product. Yes, that means it's broken. You can be satisfied with your own definition, if that makes you happy.

I really have to believe that if a customer approaches a designer to purchase a style, he has a wonderful opportunity to ask if the style will validate. And I believe those individuals who find those to be important standards will ask the questions. If they do not care, they won't ask.
That is wrong. You were a n00b once. Remember discovering something about a product that you didn't even know about - "Oh, I didn't know it could do that" - or finding out that something didn't work when you thought it did. New forum owners don't always know what's what. You see them ask the n00best questions all the time (what's a URL, why shouldn't I allow html in messages, etc.). What makes you think everyone who wants the best for their forum will know whether to ask if the code is right and won't screw up the other add-ons or modifications they want to install?

Now if you know a designer billing their work as being 100% and it isn't, then you've got somebody trying to sell a lemon and that is not right.
Gee, why do they get so upset when someone points out a few errors? If a designer wants to appear as a professional and distribute what most people would see as professional quality work, and that designer knows their work isn't of the highest standards, then he/she either tells everyone the code won't validate, or make every effort to be the professional they aspire to be.

I know it has to really knot your knickers to admit it, but good, old <br> works every time, doesn't it? It won't validate, but it still gets the job done and you cannot deny it.
Yes, it does create a line break. But it also creates the simplest errors that should be fixed to show the client that quality is important to them. Leaving something as simple to fix as <br> is just plain lazy and an indication of what to expect in more complex code. It also makes it more difficult to troubleshoot other problems.

Why should I hire a floor-covering professional to do the work on my floors? I've got a couple of buddies that will do the same work for a case of beer. What's that you say? The professional may cost more money, but he'll do a better job? Yes, I have to admit that is most likely correct.
Your buddies aren't masquerading as professionals, are they? The don't display signage or claim credentials regarding their skills, do they? Lots of correlations can be made between flooring and coding professionals or do-it-yourselfers. Do you really wanna give me more ammo?

How much money is Mark charging for the styles he's released here? How much is Peggy charging for her holiday style?

It's pretty difficult to demand perfection when you're not paying for perfection.
So, everything you get for free or really cheap is allowed to be poorly produced? C'mon, not even you believe that.
You, I, and anyone else on FAQ can have a rational discussion/debate here. There is no need to go hounding around other threads like a rabid dog. Then go on the defensive the second someone even a moderator says pipe down a bit
Since you brought up the dog metaphor, maybe you would rather I just roll over and take it like a dog? No, if someone makes false characterizations about me or my intentions, I will speak up.
I do apologize for getting my proverbial knickers in a bunch and calling you a code Nazi..but that is how you come off at times.
You contradict yourself by apologizing and insulting me in the same sentence. My skin is a lot tougher than you think. I already know I can't change your behavior, it's time you figured out that you can't change mine - or anyone else's.

As for Scott X, who was supposedly "ripped off" by Miner..
I tried not to make this a personal thing. This is the second time you have brought names into this. It's not about ScottX or even about Miner. It's about offering a product that's broken and not doing anything about it, or caring that others are stuck with fixing it. You can make it about individuals all you want, but I choose to discuss the principal of the matter.

No one was ripped off! [The designer] never guaranteed delivery of a 100% validated template and [the client] accepted the work as complete when [the designer] delivered it because it displayed correctly.
Oh please stop making excuses for sloppy work habits. It's disrespectful to the designer and the client. The particular issue you are referring to, the client DIDN'T know the code was bad or even how to check it. He DID have problems that were directly associated with the code he was sold.

Validation is just pointless all Validation does is validate that you know how to write strict code. I just don't, cannot, and never will understand the need to bash someone who got a style either a) cheap ($250) or b) Scott free.
I don't make a habit of bashing members. I bring to the attention of all the glaring issues with very poorly coded styles or modifications. I get especially disturbed when someone has paid good money for something they were under the impression would be without problems. It seems pretty sneaky to me when someone who hangs a shingle and calls themselves a pro doesn't step up to the plate to fix the problems they created.

Lastly, I never have told anyone they have to produce 100% valid code. In fact I have said it doesn't always have to validate, but there is still no reason to leave behind the remnants of such easily fixed code as line breaks and empty tags. I have always tried to offer help to correct code where it was warranted (not in the design release thread because that is for questions and comments about the design, not a "please he'p me" thread) and to also add options so the coder can make their own decisions. I try to add relevant information about code that actually helps spiders and reduce page load times. But you can never mind all that because something like...
Lots and lots of broken images...
Isn't really helpful, it's designed to attack and belittle the person. You see, it doesn't matter what or how I say it, it's protect the designer from even the slightest critique and attack the guy who thought he was being some help.

Jim

I completely understand your points with validation. I have read up on reasons to validate... cross browser compatibility, better indexing in the search engines, etc, etc..
and yes, truth be told, I could have very well gone through every style and validated it, but unfortunately, I don't have the free time to offer that right now being a father of 4, married, with a job... I'm offering these for nothing, offering my support for nothing, and I'm relying on member feedback to improve the styles.
Then do yourself and your clients a favor and start a topic somewhere about the desire to offer a nice product. It could be titled something like, "Got a nice style, please help me make it better." Then post a link to it so we can all tackle helping you fix code errors and design options. When you do the final release, it will be the best it can be, something you can be proud of and even add to your portfolio as a quality piece of work that you accomplished.

Bottom line is, when you are posting at a forum, there is not tone, pitch, expression to tell the reader of your posts that you are trying to help. Your style and history of posting is that of one who is nagging, bragging of your "excellence in coding", quick to point out what others are doing wrong... I'm happy to see I'm not the only one that noticed.
You might be right. But attitude and demeanor are not something you can force anyone to change. And if the guy is 58 and set in his ways... well, good luck wit' that. But bad code now, that's something that can be changed - if you really want to be the designer you want to be.

You can get past the attitude problems and see an issue that you can do something about, or you can let the attitude piss you off enough that you won't care that your clients are downloading bad code. It's your choice.

Jim
PS: you uploaded, what, seven styles yesterday? How many did I post diatribes about terrible coding habits in? Oh wait, I posted in one and mentioned that you had some errors you might want to take a closer look at - and provided a link to one validation page. That was some attack.

goddddddddddddddd dddddddddddaaaaaaaaammmmmmmmmmnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn


they are some long posts...........geeez people!!!!


go outside and get some air!!!!

O, that n00b question you asked Jim, who answered it? c'mon stroke my ego baby, it was ME!!!!! muahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaa (just playin)

anyway, guys, seriously. let the man rant, it's a valid and correct rant.....right? right



my .02 :)

Jim, you have been acting dickish (thats a technical term) and it does make people seem unwelcome as soon as they try their best to contribute and your picking at them, for this you deserve a e-slap

Dan, i must side with you, no-one really cares in all honesty, except Jim of course. and i kinda respect that, he holds himself to a higher standard and it's great, but it's not great to push his agenda on all others.

lastly, hey Jim, seriously, can we get on e-mail or PM and try and knock out some of the errors i have on Talk Delaware? i SO want that w3c icon, im serious...



ok thats it, thanks for listening ;)

Jim, you have been acting dickish (thats a technical term) and it does make people seem unwelcome as soon as they try their best to contribute and your picking at them, for this you deserve a e-slap
You still don't know that I'm INto pain???

lastly, hey Jim, seriously, can we get on e-mail or PM and try and knock out some of the errors i have on Talk Delaware? i SO want that w3c icon, im serious...
Hell No! C'mon man, set an example. Or do you like letting everyone think I really am just a prick with no point? Put up a new topic in the appropriate forum and lets tackle those errors a template at a time. I swear, it won't be just you that it might help. And, believe it or not, I might learn a thing or 3 my own se'f. I know I aint the only guy that understands a little about coding - and I for sure bet I ain't the best. But I'm willing to help, as I think I showed you here: http://www.vbulletin-faq.com/forum/showthread.php?p=65906#post65906

Jim

your on, let me find some time.....this time thing got me all screwed lately, can't find it no'wer

goddddddddddddddd dddddddddddaaaaaaaaammmmmmmmmmnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnROFL !!! :rofl:

pe-dan-tic (pi dan' tik) adj. 1. Displaying one's knowledge more than is necessary: She is learned, but neither stuffy nor pedantic. 2. tediously learned; scholarly in a dull and narrow way: He does not sacrifice sense and spirit to pedantic refinements.

On the original question:

To me, why not validate. Just do it, even if you don't end up fixing absolutely everything and wearing the W3C Validated badge.

I don't get my knickers all bunched up over some of the stuff, like &s= as opposed to &amp;s= (does that come from some hack I've loaded or from out of the box vB BTW - I'll get round to finding where that comes from one day), but it's saved my ass on formatting issues over different browsers a number of times. And it's no big deal to me really. It's as much a learning tool as anything else.

It's a habit - like smoking. And whether you validate or don't, or smoke or don't, it's your choice. For some people those two issues mean enough for them to spend time trying to pursuade others as to what to do. For me and I suspect lots of others, we just get on with our own thing and watch the fun when we've got a break.

But not everyone is me, and that's cool too. Be kinda boring otherwise.

Hey I have, what I feel is, an important question here about this validation issue at hand.

I went to my design site, and looked at the very first theme that I designed. Now please note this was my first design. ALL I did was replace vB default images with my images. No coding whatsoever, no moving anything around, no editing templates, there are no hacks/mods added to this theme... nothing. Simply replacing image for image.

Yet I took it through this validator thingee, and it shot out so many errors my jaw near 'bout dropped.

Most of the errors are closing tags such as </table>, </tbody>, </div>, etc.

Now, I went through the theme last night (actually around 4am as this was bothering me) and couldn't find most of the errors this thing put out. I'm not saying they aren't there. I'm saying I couldn't find them.

Does anyone find that strange?? First off, IIRC (remember, I'm no coder), the style wouldn't even work without most of those tags being closed. Especially the table tag! Yet this theme works perfectly in 4 different browsers.

Is there an explanation? I'm honestly curious.

Peggy, I don't want to take this off in a different direction, but you will recall my thinking there was a CSS error in one of your styles that I currently use.

I was banging my head against the desk, because I needed to replace a darkgray color definition with an HTML color code and I couldn't find where that darkgray existed.

I kept trying different sites that provide validation services, hoping to see a bigger chunk of the offending code than the W3C validator was showing me. (yeah, I know, why not just search the source) I found one validator that didn't even pick up on the error! I wish I could remember where I was when I found that one, but I cannot.

So there you have another fly in the ointment. One validator passed the site, whereas another validator was trapping a single error. Obviously, there were different standards being used for validation. (Maybe we could start a new rammie about which validator is the correct one to use? ;))

And, for just to clarify, the offending color definition was not the result of Peggy's design, it was done in a hack I use on the site. Peggy's design passed with no issues.

Yep I do remember that Mike. Had me banging my own head on the desk, since I've never used color names, only codes. Thanks for the clarification.

The validation thingee I'm talking about is on the w3c site. I'm assuming that's the one that most go by?

Yet I took it through this validator thingee, and it shot out so many errors my jaw near 'bout dropped.

Most of the errors are closing tags such as </table>, </tbody>, </div[COLOR=Red]>[COLOR=Black], etc.
Work on the first error reported - fix that and revalidate before you tackle the next one. The first error can trigger a whole cascade of subsequent false error reports which might disappear after you've fixed the first problem.

Colour and font tags aren't supposed to be in the XHTML code as the idea is to set these in the CSS using classes.
I kept trying different sites that provide validation services, hoping to see a bigger chunk of the offending code than the W3C validator was showing me. (yeah, I know, why not just search the source) I found one validator that didn't even pick up on the error!
Even the "official" W3C Validator is regularly being refined to be more "pedantic" err... accurate. ;)

I suspect the folks who really get their jollies on this sort of thing are still arguing about some of the finer points of coding protocol anyway. I find their advice is improving though. For example on my favorite & issue above, they do say that this could trigger a number of false error warnings (and yes, it does). But there is still scope for improvement if it is ever going to really catch on with the non :geek:

It's way better than anything I've seen as coding support for Apache, though. Now there's a coding manual that really needs help.

I don't use color names in any code. I have always used html codes. So evidently there is a hack affecting it somehow, even tho I didn't add/edit any hacks to that skin.

Try this line.

It's a built in problem with the styling options available for posting a thread.

Peggy, you've got other hacks installed that could be causing the problem. The side column stuff could be causing it, something in the ad code could be causing it, etc.

I ran into a couple bits of ad code that used an ampersand in their URL's and, as Dave will gleefully know, that ampersand will cause a validation error. Dave &amp; I have both fought that one. ;)

If you like, PM me the URL of the validator's error report and I will snoop around for you and try to help you find some of the problems. You might really be surprised how a couple of simple errors can cascade into an entire list of problems.

hmmmm would the side column hack be causing the problem when it's not used on that skin? No template edits to add it?

Wow I'm learning something new every day.

Not if it doesn't display on that style.

nope it doesn't


Try this line.

It's a built in problem with the styling options available for posting a thread.What line Dave?

The "Try this line" line :D

When a member makes a post with colours and fonts, this injects font and color tags into the XHTML.

that I know. I didn't see the color, sorry.

Please forgive me if I'm wrong here but isn't the whole point of validation to ensure future standards compliance? The WWW is an untamed beast, it may have been domesticated in some aspects but the majority of it is still feral.

From what I understand XML is the new standard, or at least it will be, and this is where the strict validation comes from. XML closes each and every tag doesn't it? If we also close every tag properly (as I think Jim said) then we ensure that our pages will be able to be parsed in future as well formed. If not well formed (not all tags closed) it might still work fine but it will, or may, eventually have to be rewritten in the future.

I know Microsoft are pushing XML like it's going out of fashion and a lot of other big corporations are too. I can't help thinking that the point of validation or 'clean code' is future parsing ability. I imagine that in the future everything will be based on XML with the point being that you define your own custom (hence the Xtensible) DTD and as long as all tags close strictly it's the equivalent of what the first HTML was created for back in the day. No matter what hardware or software you're using as long as it can parse the DTD and the content is up to standard it's ultra compatible. The HTML equivalent of a PDF I suppose.

As for people not caring about validation fair enough I say, it's a matter of personal choice. I know at this stage it might seem a little like Noah saying "there's a HUGE flood (XHTML/XML) coming you'd better build your boats..." but as ever in human matters it's up to the individual in my opinion. I just thought it was important to say why the validation is seen to be important regardless of who chooses to validate or not.

EDIT - This kind of thing has a lot of parallels within history, the container revolution when shipping containers were made into a standard size so that all ships could be designed for the same shape and size container. The standardisation of time across countries, the standardisation of metric and imperial measurements, the gauge of railway tracks as developed in the 19th century. The standardisation of the English dialect (including American English) by Samuel Johnson in 1755 I think it was. Before this dictionary English had many local dialects and local words but after the work became the de facto standard we could all agree on a common framework.