Web Standards: What are they?

Alright,

So I'm sure you've been wondering, "What the hell are standards, anyway?"

Well, it's the latest movement in the design world.

- Removing the logic from the presentation.
- Coding standards-compliant XHTML/HTML transitional code
- Using CSS for all your stylistic needs

Still confused? Don't worry, it's normal!

Moving to table-less designs has its benefits. First off, if you're a search-engine buff, the first thing you should know is that your code will make spidering your sites much easier.

For those speed-freaks, your pages will load noticeably quicker.

For those of you like me, who like to understand the code you're looking at, you'll appreciate the seperation of your business logic (php/jsp/asp/etc. code) from your presentation logic (xhtml/html/css).

Another advantage in moving towards standards-compliant code is that your sites become more accessible (to those who need specialized sofware to view/hear your sites). Accessibility is becoming a big issue in design. Governments are realizing the seriousness of this issue, are are slowly introducing legislation that will make standards-compliant websites a MUST.

It is definitely something to look into...

There are quite a few resources available online that can help steer you in the right direction:

W3C - http://www.w3c.org
CSS Zen Garden - http://www.csszengarden.com/
A List Apart - http://www.alistapart.com/index.html
BlueRobot - http://www.bluerobot.com/
Glish - http://glish.com/css/
MeyerWeb - http://www.meyerweb.com/eric/css/

Now, I'm by no means an expert in this new "way" of design. I'm a student!

If you have any resources you'd like to share, be sure to add them to the list!

uhhh... hang on a sec...

"Governments ... are slowly introducing legislation that will make standards-compliant websites a MUST. "

what exactly does that mean?

i can just see the good ol' president/prime minister trying to sue me... "MadCowDzz's website uses tables! This is absurd!"

On an obliquely related note (government intervening in potentially devastating ways with the way Web sites work), the Swedish government now requires users' consent for cookie usage. This seems only a step or two away from controlling other standards.

http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?...8&tid=95&tid=99

The cookie thing... i think if this catches on, every page will be like an adult website, meaning we'll have a lot of useless splash pages saying "This site uses cookies, if you agree click here, otherwise click here"...

personally i think it should be up to the browser to warn you... in which case i know IE already does (with the proper configuration)...

leave it to the government to mess up the internet...

They have done it with every thing else. What makes you think they wont do it here. I bet soon enough you are going to need some sort of permit to post things on the web, somewhat like how an architects has to sign plans.

And I think Frankie was referring to accessibility issues.

Yes, I was referring to accessibility... Sorry, I should have made it more clear.

Daryl, it's something that's being introduced in enterprise as we speak. The company I'm working for (you know, my little summer job! ), is starting to slowly introduce what they call "rules and regulations", which will require their sites (internal and external) to be fully accessible.

The UK government, if I'm not mistaken, is one of the first to introduce legislation. I'm not sure if the bill has already taken affect, but I can assure you it will be a requirement soon enough.

If you think about it, it's only fair. We provide alternatives to the disabled in everyday situations (parking, elevators, etc.), it's only fair that they be allowed the experience the web as close to the same way the rest of us do.

One thing everyone needs to understand is that accessibility starts from the simplest of things: font-sizes and colour contrasts between elements on the page... so to start off, it's fairly simple.

although i have done a piss poor job of following such simple guide lines on the few sites i have done, i agree 150%.

it's only fair.

Sorry, guys -- didn't mean to hijack. I understood that the original post was about accessibility. It just made me think of the cookie issue as a similar manifestation of regulation of the Web. As for standards, after looking at csszengarden when someone posted the link the other day, I'm all for going all CSS with design. When I have a chance (I'm more of a developer than a builder), I definitely want to fine-tune my CSS skills so that I can dump tables in the apps I create.

I do wonder how one would regulate accessibility. I know there are resources like Bobby that'll check for alt tags and probably reasonably contrasting colors, but how far can the government carry that? For example, do you suppose there will be color contrast reglations ("no text may appear on a background whose hexidecimal value exceeds the complementary color hexidecimal value by X") or a requirement that any sites using dropdown nav also have versions of the site without dropdowns? And whom do you regulate? Many businesses that have Web sites don't know jack about Web standards and wouldn't know an alt tag from anything (wheelchair ramps everybody can understand; Web stuff is a little more elusive). Do you fine the Web firms that build the sites in violation of standards or do you fine the clueless companies that hire them? Tough questions.

if a building falls do they arrest the architect or the owner (sorry for all the architecture refrences but that's what i do)

I don't know. Do they actually arrest someone or do negligence suits just pop up? Your analogy seems appropriate, in any case.

I worry about the problems for Web firms if standards are legislated. For example, suppose that one standard implemented is that all nav images must have alt tags. And suppose further that a Web firm does a bang-up job but manages to leave one little image on an obscure page un-alted. If a vision-impaired person hits that page, does he have the right to sue, just as the wheelchair-bound can sue if buildings have no ramps? I suppose that's the whole point of permits and regulations -- to guarantee that things are done thoroughly and correctly. But consider this example: A Web firm crosses every t and dots every i and turns the source code for a site over to its client. The client then begins making minor modifications to the site and in the process removes an alt tag. When they're sued, they point to the innocent Web firm. This sort of thing seems a little harder to pin on one party or the other than, say, the jackhammering of a wheelchair ramp after a building has been completed.

I envision having to send a copy of the site as turned over to the client to an agency that archives it in case of such disputes. Just what we need: More things to delay the launches of sites, which are hard enough to get out the door without additional blockades in many cases.

Do other general accessibility plans include requiring that all companies produce large-print business cards and brochures?

I'm not saying that creating accessible sites isn't really important. I'm just anticipating (as a thought exercise) some of the pitfalls for Web developers of doing so.

I also agree with what dhouston had to say. But I don’t doubt the gov with coming up with a screwy system where they make money off of simple mistakes. like violations fees.

No matter what I think all this is still some time away from being implemented. Unfortunately some people loose some of the senses that were are still fortunate to have. But, as crude as this may sound, there are still things they will not be able to do. i.e. driving, flying, seeing a computer screen (some more that others). So not to sound cynical, until some genius comes up with a machine that integrate brain wave with electrical impulses from a computer this will continue to be an issue. Sort of like the matrix. I know that is far fetched but could one day be a reality, or should I say virtual reality.

This is a great post really interesting subject,

I think with the introduction of W3C's XHTML standards, Transitional or Strict, it's progress in the right direction. I agree with dfano in that all these worries aren't expected anytime soon... but still now is a good time to jump on the bandwagon and start coding pages that comply to XHTML standards.

Curious though, if a web designing company advertises that they comply to W3C Standards and whatever, would a contracting company understand the differences?

Probably not, MadCowDzz, just the way most building owners don't really know the specifics of what building code their builder chooses to use. In both situations, the company hiring a contracter is sort of at the contracter's mercy.

forget that, do you think they know what HTML is? For the most case when i deal with clients they have no clue what goes into making websites.

Well, it's up the the design/development firm to educate the client. If you're up against other firms, and those firms don't support standards, by educating your clients on the advantages of following the recommended standards, you'll more than likely win the bid.

Without educating our clients in both standards compliance sites as well as browsers, the problem associated with older browsers will eventually correct itself. People will understand that using the latest standard-compliant browsers will give them the best experience possible.

As for the topic on fining those who don't comply, I can't really comment on that. If it gets to the point where corporations are ignoring the need for accessibility, fines or fees may be the only way to enforce those regulations.

I can't say this is for sure, but it sure does shed some light on the subject. Accessibility may not be taken seriously by many right now, but as the internet progresses, and companies transition their sites to standard-compliant code, the issue will become much more important.