| Author |
W3C HTML/XHTML Standard outta fashion?
|
|
| Saqib Ali 2007-01-27, 11:33 pm |
| Recently I have been trying to find a web designer that can follow the
W3C HTML/XHTML. We need a website for a non-profit re-designed and
upgraded to conform to W3c HTML/XHTML and usability standards. We have
received many quotes, and excellent/impressive portfolios. However none
of the designer had any sites in their portfolio that conformed to the
W3c standard. I am very disappointed.
Is there is directory/listing of web developer who conform to the
standards i.e. their site actually pass the XHTML validator?
Thanks
saqib (docbook.xml@XXXXXXXXXX)
http://www.full-disk-encryption.net
| |
|
| Once upon a time *Saqib Ali* wrote:
> Recently I have been trying to find a web designer that can follow the
> W3C HTML/XHTML. We need a website for a non-profit re-designed and
> upgraded to conform to W3c HTML/XHTML and usability standards. We have
> received many quotes, and excellent/impressive portfolios. However none
> of the designer had any sites in their portfolio that conformed to the
> W3c standard. I am very disappointed.
>
> Is there is directory/listing of web developer who conform to the
> standards i.e. their site actually pass the XHTML validator?
You may find some here:
http://www.w3csites.com/default.asp
--
/Arne
Proud User of SeaMonkey. Get your free copy:
http://www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/
| |
| Andy Dingley 2007-01-27, 11:33 pm |
|
Arne wrote:
> You may find some here:
> http://www.w3csites.com/default.asp
Oh depress me even further!
I looked at the first few, the design houses' own homepages.
Transitional doctypes
XHTML Appendix C
XML prologs
<table> markup
content-type <meta>
Confusion between alt and title on images
Lack of title where appropriate on other elements
OK, so they're broadly valid markup and they're probably some of the
best implemented sites out there. But these are also the specialists
making a pitch, and even then they can't get it spot on.
I had some recruitment agency spam today.
=A340k+ to wear a suit in a vaguely sales role.
=A335k to write bad websites.
=A322k to write good standards-based websites.
Why is it so hard to find good standards-aware web designers? Because
the market doesn't want them, doesn't reward them, and a typical outfit
will actually punish a competent developer who understands the issues
in favour of a Potatoshop image-slicer.
| |
| Daniel Gr 2007-01-27, 11:33 pm |
| Saqib, I think you should pick the most impressive developer you can
find at the right price, and then add an external accessibility
consultant (like myself!) to secure the code.
Sadly, there are no (or very few) overall professional web designer,
except perhaps Happy Cog and NetRelations. Most are either graphically,
information architecture or accessibility centered. Rarely all three,
or even two of those.
Sorry. But I think that's the reality you'll have to face.
Sincerely,
Daniel Gr
PS. I can drop you a few good names if you email me at d@wordly.org -
don't wanna make this post into an ad.
Saqib Ali wrote:
> Recently I have been trying to find a web designer that can follow the
> W3C HTML/XHTML. We need a website for a non-profit re-designed and
> upgraded to conform to W3c HTML/XHTML and usability standards. We have
> received many quotes, and excellent/impressive portfolios. However none
> of the designer had any sites in their portfolio that conformed to the
> W3c standard. I am very disappointed.
>
> Is there is directory/listing of web developer who conform to the
> standards i.e. their site actually pass the XHTML validator?
>
> Thanks
> saqib (docbook.xml@XXXXXXXXXX)
> http://www.full-disk-encryption.net
| |
| docbook.xml@gmail.com 2007-01-27, 11:33 pm |
| > You may find some here:
> http://www.w3csites.com/default.asp
Not a bad list. The sites are not "strict" XHTML, but I was able to
find few designers who are willing to guarantee that the final product
will be Strict XHTML complaint.... :)
Thanks for the list!!!! :-)
saqib
http://www.full-disk-encryption.net
| |
|
|
Andy Dingley wrote:
> I had some recruitment agency spam today.
> =A340k+ to wear a suit in a vaguely sales role.
> =A335k to write bad websites.
> =A322k to write good standards-based websites.
Having a good spam filter to block spam like that: priceless.
--=20
Dan
| |
| smithp0 2007-03-09, 12:39 pm |
| quote:
Originally posted by docbook.xml@XXXXXXXXXX
> You may find some here:
> http://www.w3csites.com/default.asp
Not a bad list. The sites are not "strict" XHTML, but I was able to
find few designers who are willing to guarantee that the final product
will be Strict XHTML complaint.... :)
Thanks for the list!!!! :-)
saqib
http://www.full-disk-encryption.net
May I ask why it is so important that they will produce a site so strictly xhtml compliant. |
|
|
|
| Copyright 2003 - 2009 forum4designers.com Software forum Computer Hardware reviews |