Hacker News doesn't validate

http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://news.ycombinator.com/news&charset=%28detect+automatically%29&doctype=Inline

by urlwolf • 18 years ago

39 95 18 years ago

validator.w3.org

invisible2• 18 years ago

Oh no, big deal.

Google doesn't validate: http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fgoogle.com...

Standards don't always dictate quality.

cgranade• 18 years ago

That said, the W3C validator does reveal several issues with the HN code. Sure, they aren't do-or-die issues, but they do have an effect. The validator reports that alt text is missing for several issues, that many attributes are missing quotemarks and that the DOCTYPE is missing. These issues harm accessibility and robustness.

aneesh• 18 years ago

In fact, MSN seems to be the only site in the Alexa top 20 that does validate. (But Live.com and Microsoft.com don't validate, so Microsoft isn't consistent about validating)

est2• 18 years ago

http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://wikipedia.org

Jem4• 18 years ago

Justifying something "because someone else does it like that" is akin to childhood playground antics. "But miss, I only kicked him because he kicked me first!"

As my mum always says: two wrongs don't make a right.

invisible2• 18 years ago

I wasn't saying it was justified because google does it too, I was saying it doesn't dictate quality. Many think google has a lot of quality (which is probably most important), and the same for HN.

Making silly analogies to justify standards compliance is just plain dumb if you want to play the name game.

brett• 18 years ago

I'd be pretty shocked if it did.

aston• 18 years ago

pg's stated before he treats HTML as nothing more than object code. If it runs acceptably on all platforms, who cares what it looks like?

kwamenum863• 18 years ago

code that does not validate is more lielly to break with browsers updates.

andrewtj2• 18 years ago

In my experience preemptive fixes are akin to procrastination when there's no empirical evidence to necessitate the change.

eli4• 18 years ago

and code that validates is likely to break with certain current browsers :/

daleharvey2• 18 years ago

it would be nice to be able to use an xml parser to screenscrape, i mean, missing alt tags dont really matter, but not having to write silly regexs to strip out the data you need over simple xml queries is a plus

staunch• 18 years ago

Use any decent HTML parser.

jrockway2• 18 years ago

Try cloure-html. It turns invalid HTML into valid XHTML SAX events (which can be made into a DOM with cxml-dom or cxml-stp).

The architecture of closure-html and cxml are really nice, even if you don't use Lisp. You should take a look.

kleevr3• 18 years ago

though I'm sure pg's concept of object code is outpacing-ly more resolute than my own,... I really do think I agree.

ashu• 18 years ago

That (= treating as object code) does not preclude producing validating HTML. In fact, on the contrary, that is the only way (IMHO) one can produce validating HTML - if your HTML all goes through a common piece of code for rendering tags. See AppJet's HTML producing JS functions, for example.

pxlpshr• 18 years ago

PG is brilliant and everyone has their own methodology, but there are a lot of reasons to not use tables aside from standards. Just because someone gave insight into their method, does not mean it's universal. Horses for courses...

For one, tables are excess bloat... as your site scales, those small kb turn into big bandwidth savings. Two, code uniformity is important when you have multiple people working on an intensive design and efficiency is critical. XHTML/CSS is practically the new table for new developers entering the market.

And three, as we age we get stuck in our ways. Doesn't surprise me PG may prefer tables. It took me 3 years to wean off of them... but the decision was for the better and I would never go back to tables, except for data display. :)

bradgessler• 18 years ago

HAML templates are object code-ish and those render properly. It is certainly possible to write a chunk of code that maps objects into valid XHTML. Through a style sheet on it and you're done; its not like HN has a complicated page layout.

bprater• 18 years ago

I've still yet to understand why people care so much about validation. We can barely get browsers to render things the same way, but we flip out because some folks don't close their tags.

I've never figured it out.

sharkbrainguy• 18 years ago

Invalid (x)html puts some browsers into a "quirks" mode, which makes it harder to get some things to work.

eli4• 18 years ago

But... the site does work, no?

randallsquared• 18 years ago

It would probably go farther toward validation if "<!DOCTYPE html>" was stuck on the top. :) And, since that's HTML 5, there are a lot of tags that don't need closing.

fauigerzigerk4• 18 years ago

I'm far from being militant about it, but one reason for conforming to specs is that it makes writing browsers more productive. So the people writing browsers can create new features or make their code faster instead of trying to keep up with all kinds of quirks in everyday HTML.

If one browser maker accepts a particular non-standard quirk, all others will have to follow. Sometimes this isn't a bad thing (XmlHTTPRequest) but it slows down browser development. Since browser makers can't keep up, web developers see browser incompatibilities and that makes them move to things like Fash/Flex.

So basically, the effect is that the web becomes more proprietary the more non-standard quirks have to be supported.

But still, there is clearly a tradeoff between conforming to standards, using what works to increase your own productivity, and experimenting with new things to innovate. It's not black and white in my view.

mattmaroon• 18 years ago

Just be glad it wasn't built on Viaweb.

ryanb• 18 years ago

HN also uses tables. (gasp)

est2• 18 years ago

w3c is a joke!

http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.w3.org/TR/

kleevr3• 18 years ago

at least not worse than msft: http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://w3.org/

ScottWhigham• 18 years ago

FrontPage?

run4yourlives12• 18 years ago

One validation error on the entire site is hardly a joke.

tdavis5• 18 years ago

Validation is by far the least of this site's markup concerns...

  * Font tags
  * Tables For Everything (tm)
  * Inline styles
  * Inline Javascript
  * Crazy URLs (&whence=<gibberish>)
  * Deprecated tag attributes

I could go on. I mean, it doesn't even have a Doctype. Technically, you could self-invalidate it by looking at the first source line.

I've given up caring and just accept the numerous annoyances, such as the entire page having to load before seeing anything (thanks, tables!)

Edit: Actually, the only thing I still care about is that other sites don't see this as acceptable and do it too.

ars• 18 years ago

What's wrong with inline styles and javascript?

run4yourlives12• 18 years ago

Invalidates the best practice of "separation of content from presentation".

tdavis5• 18 years ago

Aside from separation of content and presentation as mentioned, it creates serious accessibility issues and page bloat, among various other problems which we in the standards movement have tried to impart upon fellow developers for years. I encourage you to look into these issues. Here's a write-up I found from Mozilla, but there are many: https://developer.mozilla.org/en/The_Business_Benefits_of_We...

dcurtis• 18 years ago

My biggest gripe is that the white margins on the right and left are totally screwed up in desktop browsers and especially on the iPhone (forcing it to be zoomed out). Because of the way the site is built in tables, the white borders just waste whitespace and it annoys me to absolutely no end.

Tichy2• 18 years ago

Never noticed it - maybe the white margins are intentional? I just assumed they are.

Freaky• 18 years ago

> I've given up caring and just accept the numerous annoyances, such as the entire page having to load before seeing anything (thanks, tables!)

Hm? Both Opera and Firefox render HN's tables progressively.

My main problem with HN is the almost complete lack of comment formatting; no quotes, seemingly no links other than just pasting a full URL, and as you've demonstrated, no lists except using preformatted text.

fauigerzigerk4• 18 years ago

CSS is so horrible for layouting that I find it hard to blame anyone for using tables.

tdavis5• 18 years ago

Strange. I haven't used a table for page layout since the 90s and I haven't missed them, either. Yes, it takes more effort to not use tables, but since tables are not meant for page layout it makes sense to avoid them.

kleevr3• 18 years ago

Feature request:

It would be cool to have the option to see HN comments in chronological order (with second order being hierachy) but still with otherwise standard point-marking/voting. I think this is a feature I've been secretly wanting in sites like reddit and HN, because I think it is fundamentally different to watch a conversation unfold. Like pure chronilogical markers so one could step through the conversation as it happens; hopping from anchor to anchor in the order they first appeared...

because that would be sweet...

Tritis• 18 years ago

I second that. Fark.com uses flat comments and it makes it incredibly easy to pick up a discussion of interest at a later time.

Vs Slashdot.org, Digg, Reddit, or Here where a story can have twice the (possibly even insightful!) comments yet the last comment on the page is still the same from 6 hours earlier.

perezd• 18 years ago

STOP THE PRESSES!

I swear this comes up every few months. Afterall, this site is so non-compliant, I am surprised anyone even comes here!

cosmo7• 18 years ago

Well this explains all the crazy moderation my comments get.

run4yourlives12• 18 years ago

Save it. PG feels that HTML is simply object code. The argument that standards would make his life easier is not one he accepts. (Regardless of whether this is true or not)

mynameishere• 18 years ago

Just tested this on one of my sites. 48 errors. Damn. Wish I had 48 middle fingers to respond with.

icey• 18 years ago

May I suggest recursion?

Andi• 18 years ago

AND WHO CARES?

juliend2• 18 years ago

ksvs• 18 years ago

Try Bureaucrat News.

fx• 18 years ago

OMG, shut down HN now! it uses table and doesn't validate. Who's going to save semantic web now?

pogos• 18 years ago

The best validator is a browser.

amr• 18 years ago

Which browser?

fauigerzigerk4• 18 years ago

Since this site doesn't have a doctype, it doesn't claim to conform to any standard. So what does validation mean if you don't have a spec to validate against?

What could be discussed is whether it's good to build on web specs or not.

mhp• 18 years ago

Who cares?!!?!

pkrumins• 18 years ago

It truly doesn't matter!

tylermenezes• 18 years ago

Who cares? Really?

Does this site load? Is it fast? Then what exactly is the problem? Validation ensures that standards-compliant browsers will, in the future, render the page correctly. If the people behind the code are willing to rewrite it, fine, it's their choice. It makes no difference for anyone outside of the team whether it validates or not. Most browsers don't even respect the standards fully.

Hacker News doesn't validate

Related Stories