Lets check up on ISP's websites

K

Karnaugh

Banned
Joined
Jul 23, 2003
Messages
1,575
Reaction score
4
Location
Durban, South Africa
So I got an idea from the other thread, and that was to check some ISP's websites for W3C validation.

---

http://www.is.co.za/
Result: Failed validation, Sorry, I am unable to validate this document because on line 81, 138 it contained one or more bytes that I cannot interpret as utf-8 (in other words, the bytes found are not valid values in the specified Character Encoding). Please check both the content of the file and the character encoding indication.
[Evidently their doctype is improperly set.]

http://www.uunet.co.za/
Result: Failed validation, Sorry, I am unable to validate this document because on line 312, 339 it contained one or more bytes that I cannot interpret as utf-8 (in other words, the bytes found are not valid values in the specified Character Encoding). Please check both the content of the file and the character encoding indication.

http://www.mweb.co.za/
Result: Failed validation, 247 errors
This page is not Valid XHTML 1.0 Strict!

http://www.webafrica.co.za/
Result: Failed validation, 187 errors
This page is not Valid HTML 4.01 Transitional!

http://www.imaginet.co.za/
Result: Failed validation, 146 errors
This page is not Valid -//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 transitional//EN!

http://www.axxess.co.za/
Result: Failed validation, 101 errors
This page is not Valid (no Doctype found)!

http://www.polka.co.za/
Result: Failed validation, 83 errors
This page is not Valid XHTML 1.0 Strict!

http://www.saix.net/
Result: Failed validation, 50 errors
This page is not Valid (no Doctype found)!

http://www.datapro.co.za
Result: Failed validation, 38 errors
This page is not Valid (no Doctype found)!

http://www.telkom.co.za/
Result: Failed validation, 37 errors
This page is not Valid (no Doctype found)!

http://www.budgetadsl.co.za/
Result: Failed validation, 22 errors
This page is not Valid (no Doctype found)!

http://www.nukecap.co.za/
Result: Failed validation, 21 errors
This page is not Valid XHTML 1.1!

http://www.storm.co.za/
Result: Failed validation, 17 errors
This page is not Valid XHTML 1.0 Strict!

http://www.hellkom.co.za/
Result: Failed validation, 6 errors

-- Setting the example --
http://www.budgetadsl.co.za/
Result: Passed validation
This Page Is Valid HTML 4.01 Strict!
---

Hellkom wins, MaD can collect his cookie. Still this is pathetic, a shame and a dirty spot on the south african internet that not even ISP's can manage to have a website that passes validation - sad of all, some are even trying to claim they are XHTML 1.0 Strict when their HTML output is anything but that (This is most likely why they fail)

Notice where Telkom placed.
 
Last edited:
Hellkom wins, MaD can collect his cookie.
Click to expand...

and the cupcake I gave u earlier :D

It is such a stupid system any ways.... No one really cares about web standards (except clearly you do). It is no suprise that not many of the developers and designers are rushing off you fix these error's. I will take a bet that if you get the stats of the top 20 most visited sites in the country not one will pass.... And sorry www.karnaugh.za.net does not fall into the top 20 sites(but kudo's to you cause you passed validation)

www.cnn.com Failed validation, 27 errors
www.yahoo.com Failed validation, 271 errors
www.msn.com Failed validation, 7 errors
www.google.co.za -> Failed 83 errors , which makes me rest my case
 
Last edited:
What exactly is the point of the validation? Other than a seemingly meanless noddy badge?
 
W3C Validation doesn't mean anything in my book, a site that works in Firefox, IE and Opera is all the validation I need. Often sites that have W3C validation render pathetically in different browsers...
 
One of the main reasons why so many sites fail is that they get designed to work in IE which is very uncompliant -- Firefox and Opera adhere much closer to the W3C standards.
 
It is highly unlikely that a site which is XHTML 1.0 valid will render differently in different browsers ( IE excluded ). Funnily enough, if you do set the doctype correctly and prepend the right XML headder your site *will* render properly and consistently - even in IE. The "point" of it is that your website doesn't have bogus tags and abides to the propper rules set out in the HTML langauge standard. You don't exactly go around compiling VB with a C++ compiler now do you? The fact that browsers generaly make their way around these things (or ignore them alot of the time) is mute.
 
lol google has more errors than words on there page
 
I think the reason that Telkom's site validated so well was because it was probably validating a 404! :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X