<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: March to Your Own Standard</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.mikeindustries.com/blog/archive/2004/06/march-to-your-own-standard/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.mikeindustries.com/feeder/?FeederAction=clicked&amp;feed=Articles+%28RSS2%29&amp;seed=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mikeindustries.com%2Fblog%2Farchive%2F2004%2F06%2Fmarch-to-your-own-standard&amp;seed_title=March+to+Your+Own+Standard</link>
	<description>A running commentary of occasionally interesting things.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 13 Mar 2010 19:20:06 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Spinz.se - Anv&#228;ndbarhet i fokus</title>
		<link>http://www.mikeindustries.com/feeder/?FeederAction=clicked&amp;feed=Articles+%28RSS2%29&amp;seed=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mikeindustries.com%2Fblog%2Farchive%2F2004%2F06%2Fmarch-to-your-own-standard&amp;seed_title=March+to+Your+Own+Standard/comment-page-2#comment-39528</link>
		<dc:creator>Spinz.se - Anv&#228;ndbarhet i fokus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Oct 2008 15:05:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-39528</guid>
		<description>[...] (CSS). Ska man dÃ¥ fÃ¶lja dessa rekomendationer eller inte? Efter att ha lÃ¤st ett inlÃ¤gg av Mike Davidson pÃ¥ hans blogg Ã¤ndrade jag min Ã¥sikt. I bÃ¶rjan var jag mycket noga med att fÃ¶lja de regler som [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] (CSS). Ska man dÃ¥ fÃ¶lja dessa rekomendationer eller inte? Efter att ha lÃ¤st ett inlÃ¤gg av Mike Davidson pÃ¥ hans blogg Ã¤ndrade jag min Ã¥sikt. I bÃ¶rjan var jag mycket noga med att fÃ¶lja de regler som [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: K.I.S.S. Your Way to an Optimized Site &#124; W3 EDGE &#124; Boston, MA</title>
		<link>http://www.mikeindustries.com/feeder/?FeederAction=clicked&amp;feed=Articles+%28RSS2%29&amp;seed=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mikeindustries.com%2Fblog%2Farchive%2F2004%2F06%2Fmarch-to-your-own-standard&amp;seed_title=March+to+Your+Own+Standard/comment-page-2#comment-34395</link>
		<dc:creator>K.I.S.S. Your Way to an Optimized Site &#124; W3 EDGE &#124; Boston, MA</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Oct 2008 16:55:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-34395</guid>
		<description>[...] to semantically describe content. Once mastered, the web developer is able to make intelligent and conscious decisions on the &#8220;right&#8221; compromises to be made for a given project. We are constantly working [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] to semantically describe content. Once mastered, the web developer is able to make intelligent and conscious decisions on the &#8220;right&#8221; compromises to be made for a given project. We are constantly working [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Thesis is not XHTML valid - Page 2 - DIY Themes Forums</title>
		<link>http://www.mikeindustries.com/feeder/?FeederAction=clicked&amp;feed=Articles+%28RSS2%29&amp;seed=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mikeindustries.com%2Fblog%2Farchive%2F2004%2F06%2Fmarch-to-your-own-standard&amp;seed_title=March+to+Your+Own+Standard/comment-page-2#comment-34130</link>
		<dc:creator>Thesis is not XHTML valid - Page 2 - DIY Themes Forums</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Sep 2008 04:56:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-34130</guid>
		<description>[...] -   Is this the blog you were thinking of with the &quot;intentionally invalid&quot; badge&quot;?  Mike Davidson - March to Your Own Standard    __________________ Jay Thompson  Thesis Sites:  Phoenix Real Estate Guy Phoenix Real Estate [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] &#8211;   Is this the blog you were thinking of with the &quot;intentionally invalid&quot; badge&quot;?  Mike Davidson &#8211; March to Your Own Standard    __________________ Jay Thompson  Thesis Sites:  Phoenix Real Estate Guy Phoenix Real Estate [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TNTPixel :: Ahh Firefox. Why must thou disappoint?</title>
		<link>http://www.mikeindustries.com/feeder/?FeederAction=clicked&amp;feed=Articles+%28RSS2%29&amp;seed=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mikeindustries.com%2Fblog%2Farchive%2F2004%2F06%2Fmarch-to-your-own-standard&amp;seed_title=March+to+Your+Own+Standard/comment-page-2#comment-32741</link>
		<dc:creator>TNTPixel :: Ahh Firefox. Why must thou disappoint?</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Apr 2008 19:38:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-32741</guid>
		<description>[...] Secondly, opacity is a CSS 3 property, so your stylesheet will not validate. On a lighter note, I honestly donâ€™t think your stylsheets should necessarily validate. Iâ€™d rather my site works like I want it to (across most browsers), than have a nice shiny validation badge. But hey, thatâ€™s just meâ€¦ and others. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Secondly, opacity is a CSS 3 property, so your stylesheet will not validate. On a lighter note, I honestly donâ€™t think your stylsheets should necessarily validate. Iâ€™d rather my site works like I want it to (across most browsers), than have a nice shiny validation badge. But hey, thatâ€™s just meâ€¦ and others. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sue Denem &#187; Blog Archive &#187; You can&#8217;t do that&#8230;</title>
		<link>http://www.mikeindustries.com/feeder/?FeederAction=clicked&amp;feed=Articles+%28RSS2%29&amp;seed=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mikeindustries.com%2Fblog%2Farchive%2F2004%2F06%2Fmarch-to-your-own-standard&amp;seed_title=March+to+Your+Own+Standard/comment-page-2#comment-32690</link>
		<dc:creator>Sue Denem &#187; Blog Archive &#187; You can&#8217;t do that&#8230;</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Apr 2008 08:57:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-32690</guid>
		<description>[...] a discussion on web standards, I cited an article on Mike Davidson&#8217;s blog.&#160; Someone disagreeing with the points I raised retorted with: You can&#8217;t really refer to [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] a discussion on web standards, I cited an article on Mike Davidson&#8217;s blog.&#160; Someone disagreeing with the points I raised retorted with: You can&#8217;t really refer to [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sue Denem &#187; Blog Archive &#187; As Standard</title>
		<link>http://www.mikeindustries.com/feeder/?FeederAction=clicked&amp;feed=Articles+%28RSS2%29&amp;seed=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mikeindustries.com%2Fblog%2Farchive%2F2004%2F06%2Fmarch-to-your-own-standard&amp;seed_title=March+to+Your+Own+Standard/comment-page-2#comment-32688</link>
		<dc:creator>Sue Denem &#187; Blog Archive &#187; As Standard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Apr 2008 08:36:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-32688</guid>
		<description>[...] More Reading&#8230;  &#160; [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] More Reading&#8230;  &nbsp; [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Book of Ryan &#187; Doublethinking version targeting</title>
		<link>http://www.mikeindustries.com/feeder/?FeederAction=clicked&amp;feed=Articles+%28RSS2%29&amp;seed=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mikeindustries.com%2Fblog%2Farchive%2F2004%2F06%2Fmarch-to-your-own-standard&amp;seed_title=March+to+Your+Own+Standard/comment-page-2#comment-32284</link>
		<dc:creator>The Book of Ryan &#187; Doublethinking version targeting</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2008 09:05:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-32284</guid>
		<description>[...] Marko Karppinen&#8217;s study assumes that validity has anything to do with standards-based design, which it clearly does not. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Marko Karppinen&#8217;s study assumes that validity has anything to do with standards-based design, which it clearly does not. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: david jewell dot net</title>
		<link>http://www.mikeindustries.com/feeder/?FeederAction=clicked&amp;feed=Articles+%28RSS2%29&amp;seed=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mikeindustries.com%2Fblog%2Farchive%2F2004%2F06%2Fmarch-to-your-own-standard&amp;seed_title=March+to+Your+Own+Standard/comment-page-2#comment-32239</link>
		<dc:creator>david jewell dot net</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Feb 2008 06:06:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-32239</guid>
		<description>[...] I don&#8217;t care. Officially. I&#8217;ve taken precedent (kind of) from Mike Davidson, and am purposefully leaving my site erroneous(in some eyes). Just to let everyone know, I&#8217;ll [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] I don&#8217;t care. Officially. I&#8217;ve taken precedent (kind of) from Mike Davidson, and am purposefully leaving my site erroneous(in some eyes). Just to let everyone know, I&#8217;ll [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: 6 Things Webdesigners Should Check Before a Site Goes Live &#124; Chris Laskey Design Blog</title>
		<link>http://www.mikeindustries.com/feeder/?FeederAction=clicked&amp;feed=Articles+%28RSS2%29&amp;seed=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mikeindustries.com%2Fblog%2Farchive%2F2004%2F06%2Fmarch-to-your-own-standard&amp;seed_title=March+to+Your+Own+Standard/comment-page-2#comment-32196</link>
		<dc:creator>6 Things Webdesigners Should Check Before a Site Goes Live &#124; Chris Laskey Design Blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Feb 2008 16:11:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-32196</guid>
		<description>[...] Have you run it through the W3C HTML and CSS Validators? Whether you believe in standards or make a great argument for breaking them, the W3C validators are still a great way to catch minor errors in your code. We designers are [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Have you run it through the W3C HTML and CSS Validators? Whether you believe in standards or make a great argument for breaking them, the W3C validators are still a great way to catch minor errors in your code. We designers are [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: echo &#8220;hey, it works&#8221; &#62; /dev/null &#187; Browser wars and crappily broken web sites</title>
		<link>http://www.mikeindustries.com/feeder/?FeederAction=clicked&amp;feed=Articles+%28RSS2%29&amp;seed=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mikeindustries.com%2Fblog%2Farchive%2F2004%2F06%2Fmarch-to-your-own-standard&amp;seed_title=March+to+Your+Own+Standard/comment-page-2#comment-31527</link>
		<dc:creator>echo &#8220;hey, it works&#8221; &#62; /dev/null &#187; Browser wars and crappily broken web sites</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Dec 2007 00:08:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-31527</guid>
		<description>[...] your web site is broken.&#8221; &#8220;Meh, read this.&#8221; &#8220;Um, but your site is broken in stupid, careless and lazy ways. You&#8217;re not [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] your web site is broken.&#8221; &#8220;Meh, read this.&#8221; &#8220;Um, but your site is broken in stupid, careless and lazy ways. You&#8217;re not [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Design Springs &#187; Does Validation really matters?</title>
		<link>http://www.mikeindustries.com/feeder/?FeederAction=clicked&amp;feed=Articles+%28RSS2%29&amp;seed=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mikeindustries.com%2Fblog%2Farchive%2F2004%2F06%2Fmarch-to-your-own-standard&amp;seed_title=March+to+Your+Own+Standard/comment-page-2#comment-31213</link>
		<dc:creator>Design Springs &#187; Does Validation really matters?</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Nov 2007 05:17:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-31213</guid>
		<description>[...] code to check if there are any errors in it. But even though you validate it, its not always valid. Check this article about making your own [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] code to check if there are any errors in it. But even though you validate it, its not always valid. Check this article about making your own [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: March to Your Own Standard &#171; GreenFloor</title>
		<link>http://www.mikeindustries.com/feeder/?FeederAction=clicked&amp;feed=Articles+%28RSS2%29&amp;seed=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mikeindustries.com%2Fblog%2Farchive%2F2004%2F06%2Fmarch-to-your-own-standard&amp;seed_title=March+to+Your+Own+Standard/comment-page-2#comment-30552</link>
		<dc:creator>March to Your Own Standard &#171; GreenFloor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Sep 2007 08:32:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-30552</guid>
		<description>[...] 11th, 2007   You know, for some reason this guy makes a whole lot of sense. Mike Davidson - March to Your Own Standard You know all the rules, but only through trial-and-error will you learn all of the many exceptions. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] 11th, 2007   You know, for some reason this guy makes a whole lot of sense. Mike Davidson &#8211; March to Your Own Standard You know all the rules, but only through trial-and-error will you learn all of the many exceptions. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Shaun Inman</title>
		<link>http://www.mikeindustries.com/feeder/?FeederAction=clicked&amp;feed=Articles+%28RSS2%29&amp;seed=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mikeindustries.com%2Fblog%2Farchive%2F2004%2F06%2Fmarch-to-your-own-standard&amp;seed_title=March+to+Your+Own+Standard/comment-page-1#comment-48</link>
		<dc:creator>Shaun Inman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-48</guid>
		<description>First, thanks for the plug&#8212;Go IFR!

Second I wouldn&#039;t go so far as to completely vilify validation. While I agree that validation isn&#039;t something worth wagging fingers over, it is extremely useful in a production environment. 

As you&#039;ve beautifully illustrated, it doesn&#039;t make a spit of difference to today&#039;s user agents which are still accustomed to bruised mark-up but validation is an essential first step in troubleshooting rendering or display issues. Once all the simple, obvious things are accounted for (encoding the required entities, closing open tags, correcting tag case) it&#039;s far easier (and less time consuming) to track down the source of the problem. Otherwise, I need to sort through line after line of the validator harping on inconsequential errors in order to find the real cause&#8212;assuming it&#039;s even a problem with the X/HTML!  But once the source is valid then I know it&#039;s either a problem with the CSS or a particular browsers misrendering of the CSS.

Being able to eliminate some guess work on the way to a solution and the resulting time savings is reason enough to write valid code.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>First, thanks for the plug&mdash;Go IFR!</p>
<p>Second I wouldn&#8217;t go so far as to completely vilify validation. While I agree that validation isn&#8217;t something worth wagging fingers over, it is extremely useful in a production environment. </p>
<p>As you&#8217;ve beautifully illustrated, it doesn&#8217;t make a spit of difference to today&#8217;s user agents which are still accustomed to bruised mark-up but validation is an essential first step in troubleshooting rendering or display issues. Once all the simple, obvious things are accounted for (encoding the required entities, closing open tags, correcting tag case) it&#8217;s far easier (and less time consuming) to track down the source of the problem. Otherwise, I need to sort through line after line of the validator harping on inconsequential errors in order to find the real cause&mdash;assuming it&#8217;s even a problem with the X/HTML!  But once the source is valid then I know it&#8217;s either a problem with the CSS or a particular browsers misrendering of the CSS.</p>
<p>Being able to eliminate some guess work on the way to a solution and the resulting time savings is reason enough to write valid code.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeremy Flint</title>
		<link>http://www.mikeindustries.com/feeder/?FeederAction=clicked&amp;feed=Articles+%28RSS2%29&amp;seed=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mikeindustries.com%2Fblog%2Farchive%2F2004%2F06%2Fmarch-to-your-own-standard&amp;seed_title=March+to+Your+Own+Standard/comment-page-1#comment-49</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeremy Flint</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-49</guid>
		<description>I agree with shaun.

I validate pages to look for errors in code. If I find no errors, then I know it is a CSS problem. If the CSS validates, I know it is a browser problem and I can begin to work around it.

Validation matters in a production environment, but sites are not always going to be valid. Why? Say you design a site and hand it off to a client. There is no telling what they will do the site once they get a hold of it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with shaun.</p>
<p>I validate pages to look for errors in code. If I find no errors, then I know it is a CSS problem. If the CSS validates, I know it is a browser problem and I can begin to work around it.</p>
<p>Validation matters in a production environment, but sites are not always going to be valid. Why? Say you design a site and hand it off to a client. There is no telling what they will do the site once they get a hold of it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike D.</title>
		<link>http://www.mikeindustries.com/feeder/?FeederAction=clicked&amp;feed=Articles+%28RSS2%29&amp;seed=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mikeindustries.com%2Fblog%2Farchive%2F2004%2F06%2Fmarch-to-your-own-standard&amp;seed_title=March+to+Your+Own+Standard/comment-page-1#comment-50</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike D.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-50</guid>
		<description>Yep.  I agree with both of you.  Validation, right now, is most useful as a tool to help you debug your own stuff.  But if you&#039;re perfect like me, you never have to debug. :)

Honestly though, I find a lot more of my display errors during design phase are related to browser quirks than invalid code. What I really need is Doug Bowman or Dave Shea built right into my OS.  Kind of like Clippy the Microsoft Office assistant, but with useful stuff to say.

One feature I wish the W3C validator had was the ability to ignore certain errors.  For instance, we still have hundreds of unencoded ampersands littering ESPN because of our ad server, and any attempt at debugging based on the validator&#039;s output is tough.

Anybody know of any client-side validators out there which let you turn off certain errors?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yep.  I agree with both of you.  Validation, right now, is most useful as a tool to help you debug your own stuff.  But if you&#8217;re perfect like me, you never have to debug. :)</p>
<p>Honestly though, I find a lot more of my display errors during design phase are related to browser quirks than invalid code. What I really need is Doug Bowman or Dave Shea built right into my OS.  Kind of like Clippy the Microsoft Office assistant, but with useful stuff to say.</p>
<p>One feature I wish the W3C validator had was the ability to ignore certain errors.  For instance, we still have hundreds of unencoded ampersands littering ESPN because of our ad server, and any attempt at debugging based on the validator&#8217;s output is tough.</p>
<p>Anybody know of any client-side validators out there which let you turn off certain errors?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
