8 Web Development Mistakes that Make Any Site Look Bad

Whether you’re a developer, a designer or just an entrepreneur, a professional website is nearly impossible to do business without. While most people spend endless amounts of time to get the design of the site just right, most people don’t even pay attention to what’s behind that design. Unfortunately no matter how awesome your website looks in the front-end, bad development can ruin your visitors’ experience and make them run away quicker than you can say “HTML5″.

It is worth it to pay as much for development as for the actual design itself. Here are eight web development mistakes that could be costing you business.

1. Slow Loading

One of the first things a visitor notices about your site is how fast it loads. This is especially important now in the age of mobile browsing and mi-fi setups. When you’re stuck with a slow loading site, it can be tough to diagnose (I was once “graced” with this problem myself). Here are a few things you can look at to speed up your sluggish site:

  • Images – Do you use a lot of images? Are they web optimized? Try using something like Yahoo’s Smush.it to see if you can compress them some more.
  • Database Calls – If you’re using a CMS, it’s possible that it’s calling to the database way too many times, making your site take longer to load. Try going through the code and replacing as much as the dynamic content as you can with static. Does everything really need to be updatable by the CMS?
  • Server – I was once with a certain host that caused my site to take over 17 seconds to load! They tried to tell me it was my install of WordPress and the theme I was using, but when I finally switched hosts, the site ran in under two seconds. It seems they simply stuff too many people on one server with too little power.
  • Javascript Errors – Another biggy, if you have JS errors, or a site you’re using to host your JS is done, this can make the page almost unloadable. Make sure something like a Tweet or Facebook button doesn’t hold up the rest of your site if their API is down.
  • CSS/HTML – Is your code bloated? I’ve seen sites that have had thousands of lines of code that could’ve been accomplished in just a few hundred. Take a look and see if the code itself needs to be pared down, as well as running it through a minifier.

2. Broken Mobile Experience

While the computer is still the #1 way people access the internet, mobile is quickly catching up. New toys like smartphones, tablets and even mobile powered laptops and netbooks are quickly being used in place of a full-sized computer. Your visitors no longer view your site in 1024 or higher resolution, you’re now faced with dealing with a bunch of smaller resolutions.

While I don’t believe every site needs an app, or even a mobile web site, your site needs to at least look and function probably in the mobile world. If it works just as well on these devices as it does on your computer, you’re good to go. If not, you’re missing on a lot of traffic and potential business.

3. All Javascript–No Static

You’ve probably heard about the recent blow up of a popular network–after launching a new version of their site, one error on one like of Javascript caused the entire site to come up completely blank for ever user. Why? The simple version was that they decided to use AJAX and JS to load ALL of their content. Which also meant that devices that have JS turned off by default (some Android devices) can’t see the site at all, even when they fixed the bug.

4. No Testing Needed…

One of the biggest mistakes I see clients make, is that they launch the site before they’ve fully tested it. Contact forms get sent to nowhere, the gallery is broken, and the menu still has address hash-tag placeholders. This not only deters visitors, it also makes your company look like amateurs. Please make sure to fully test the site before you launch – it helps to grab a couple of your friends and let them browse the site as well. You’ll be surprised at what kind of bugs they’ll come across.

5. Invalid HTML

A lot of developers still argue whether it’s important to validate your HTML or not. I say, why not? There’s no excuse not to validate, and validation catches a ton of bugs before they make it into the live version. Especially when it comes to making the site consistent across browsers, validating can be a major, major help. Plus, it really doesn’t take any good developer extra time to do, and it means your site is less likely to have issues when browsers and code standards are updated.

6. Tables

I can’t believe that in 2011 I still have to tell people to stop using table-based layouts. But I do. Don’t ever, ever, ever use them. Tables are meant for tabular data, not layouts. Not only will you waste a ton of time trying to get the site to conform in all browsers, you’ll have unnecessary images from the slice tool, bloated code and other nasties. I repeat, don’t use tables!

7. Naughty SEO Tactics

Some people are obsessed with SEO, but in the real world, SEO really isn’t that big of a deal for most companies. The truth is, there are billions of web sites out there, Google is changing things all of the time, and most visitors probably won’t find you through search.

So that being said, please stop using bad SEO tactics. It’s one thing to optimize your site with good keywords, it’s entirely different to stuff every crevice with them. Don’t cram keywords in the footer and sidebar. Don’t just randomly throw them in your content. The key to good SEO is making the content real and relevant. It should happen without you really trying.

8. Forgetting About Accessibility

One of the key things that people forget, is that everyone who browses the internet isn’t exactly like them. There are blind people, deaf people, people with color blindness and more who want to navigate on your site. If you forget to put accessibility items like alt and link title tags, you can be missing the traffic from disabled persons. Your site is awesome and you want everyone to be able to experience it, right?

Your Thoughts

What are some of the worst development mistakes you’ve seen people make? How does it affect normal users?

Comments

  1. says

    I have problems with slow loading. I’ve contacted my hosting Support but the result, like you said, blaming it on my CMS theme and plug-ins. The funny thing is it loads fast at certain time of the day and slow again at certain time of the day. I know it’s now time for me to switch to a new hosting company.

    If you use WordPress, I don’t recommend anyone to use GD (the hosting company that invest big bucks on advertising during Super Bowl, but can’t hire quality Technical Support to solve problems.

  2. says

    Nice article Amber !!!

    Also important to note is the use of minimal Flash or no Flash at all.

    I’m still surprised how many clients still demand Flash based websites
    in this era of search engine optimization.

    Nick Desai

  3. says

    Got a few clients who signed you themselves with godaddy and always complaining about not getting their emails in time or not at all. I think Hosting it with a good company would resolve a lot of the issues.

  4. says

    We as a human have the habit of forgetting minor things that makes a site complete. either it is due to deadline, load of work or some other reason.

    But, the best way to overcome this habit is to make a checklist of all the things that should be tested in the end.

  5. says

    Thanks for the article.

    I agree with all of the points made, but especially with #8, accessibility. I am deaf, so it infuriates me that screencasts and videos often don’t come with transcription (in the form of a supporting article or a literal transcription) or good subtitling.

    I know that for example with SitePoint, when they started doing their video series of CSS and HTMl tutorials, they attempted to use subtitling. It was so bad, it didn’t even make sense. So I was watching what was going on, and all the time, the captions were saying about totally unrelated stuff, and with broken English. It was totally unacceptable. Even though SitePoint had the right idea, they didn’t even bother to test it out before making it available to people like me.

    So people, if you’re publishing videos and screencasts, please add a supporting article or a literal transcription of the video/screencast content.

    @Bogdan Pop, I disagree. Any website design consists of code/markup and images as well as content. You can still create interesting and memorable websites using good coding practices. There isn’t any such thing as original any more, as it’s all been done in various ways.

    If a designer/developer tells me that they can’t achieve an interesting and memorable website layout using good practices then I would be refusing to hire them, simply because that tells me they are not professional, they are cowboys.

  6. says

    3. All Javascript–No Static — I’m pretty sure I know who you are talking about (starts with G, ends with ‘modo’) and regardless of the design debate upon their launch, like you say the technical makeup of the site was basically unacceptable because of its reliance on javascript. And upon launch there were some performance problems, I couldn’t even load the site from my office with cable connection! A very ouchy revamp for them, I’m sure.

    While I agree with 7. Naughty SEO Tactics that SEO isn’t the end-all be-all, there is still a lot of money to be made by ranking well in search. Black hat technique aren’t worth it (and Google just cracked down further) but adjusting content for search sure can make a difference.

  7. says

    I’ve spoken to a lot of people annoyed by how slow there site is running and a question they commonly ask is should I switch hosting provider and my answer in most cases is no. Running a site through tools like YSlow, PageSpeed and the all mighty WebPageTest.org often spring up tonnes of simple ways to speed up a site, as much less painful solutions to the hassle of switching provider. The big areas to look for are can the page size be reduces using image optimization, CSS and JS minification, and by switching on GZip compression? Can I reduce the number of HTTP requests to load the page by combining stylesheets, scripts and images. Am I using the optimal browser caching strategy? Are my files being loaded in the correct order to get the page to render earlier and to get the important content up first?

  8. says

    Tables, ugh!

    I find it all the time. Drives me crazy. I created one site, handed it over and the company’s programmers decided to place the whole thing in tables.

    I don’t understand why it’s still done and I feel it’s pure laziness on their part.

    It’s so difficult to fix sites with tables incorporated as the coding of the site.

    When i got into the biz, I did the same thing, because it’s what I was taught. I eventually learned css is the way to go!

    I’ve actually gone so far as to use css for tabular data, but I use tables for tabular data now.

  9. says

    Thanks to an awesome web designer, I managed to avoid all of these major pitfalls on my website. Lots of people told me not to “waste” money on a web designer and gave me information on do-it-yourself sites, but I knew I didn’t have the experience or computer savvy to design a user-friendly site. It was well worth my money to hire someone who did.

  10. says

    @Jerry: I don’t think it’s laziness. It’s more ignorance, as in they don’t know any better type ignorance. Some programmers are afraid to dive into HTML/CSS and JavaScript and would prefer to stick to the backend.

    If you are involved as a leader of one of these teams, it’s important to get the developers over their hump by getting them involved and by empowering them to continuously improve their skills.

    Developers should understand that they should use a certain percentage of their time to improve their skills. By not doing so, they risk becoming obsolete.

    If you’re contracting freelancers to do the coding for you, then your influence might be more difficult to apply.

    There are some tips here regarding What to do if you do not “like” work produced by a freelancer.

  11. says

    @Gemma
    Maybe I was a bit unclear in my previous comment. First of all I didn’t say you always have to do that. What I said was that sometimes you have no other choice. And if you think that there’s no original ideas left or ideas that need breaking out of the standards box in order to have a finite result, that’s very unfortunate.

    Let me put this in a different perspective. If people in the Gothic period would have had the same mindset as you have, we wouldn’t have had the Renaissance or otherwise said: Da Vinci or Michelangelo.

    So I must stick to my point. There still are infinite originals works, ideas, sites or solutions for problems – they are too be discovered. And it sure may be the case that some of them will break current standards and rules. This applies to all domains, not just web development or business.

    But, to agree in part with you, you’re right in the fact that web professionals that don’t properly code websites that can be easily built around current standards are completely unprofessional.

  12. says

    @Bogdan Pop,

    Standards include things like accessibility as well as clean semantic code, etc. I would not hire someone who had an original idea (let’s assume they did) and wanted to use it in my project at the expense of standards. I would tell them to do it in their own time, but not on my watch. Because, for me, standards, etc is extremely important, and a good looking, well functioning website is achievable with standards. I wouldn’t have a problem if the so-called original design was created with standards in mind.

    I am actually right now working on stuff, where I want to break out of the box, away from current trends. And I can tell you that my stuff isn’t what I’d call completely original. In fact it’s something that improves drastically on currently existing designs, so it will look very different to what people are used to, but it isn’t completely original because it’s a mixture of ideas that people have already come up with, only, I’ll have improved on them in various ways and used them together in a way that isn’t commonly seen. And it’s going to be done to standards when I get to the coding. It’s not for someone else, but if it all works well, I’ll likely stick it on a marketplace.

    Let me put it another way, so far, nearly every time someone posted something that they claimed is unique and original, I’ve disagreed because I’ve seen something similar to what they’ve put out. On the odd occasion, I’ve thought to myself that I’ve not seen this before, and then a day or two later, I come across something that looks similar to it! So, I doubt your design work is going to make me say, “Okay now that is original!”

    The non-standard stuff has no place in commercial work, especially if it breaks the laws in the US, UK and in other countries like Australia. There’s nothing wrong with using non-standards when it comes to personal websites like blogs etc when you’re not providing services to others. But it has no place when the website in question is providing services to others. There are already many websites out there breaking the law, and I won’t add to that number, being physically challenged myself. ;-) Even if it doesn’t break the law, it’s no good if it’s based on Flash, or if it’s slow loading, or if it’s heavily reliant on Javascript, and so on.

  13. says

    @Bogdan Pop

    There is never any excuse to not have your HTML validated. Never. It’s one thing to use CSS3 to invalidate CSS. That’s ok. But I’ve never seen a real reason never to have your HTML validated. It’s pure laziness and unprofessional not to. Plus, a lot of clients won’t even talk to you about work if it isn’t valid.

  14. says

    As always, great post!

    The thing I hate most is tables. UGH. I worked at a place for a while where the site was built using tables, they wouldn’t allow me to upgrade to todays standards, and updating it made me want to shoot myself in the face with a bow and arrow. It was horrible. Yay for new job though :-)

    I will admit that I have a JS error I cannot fix which is making my own website load a smidge slower than normal. Regardless it is still pretty fast. If anyone has nothing to do and feels like telling me what’s wrong, feel free (www.anythinggraphic.net). A redesign from the ground up is in the mix though. Hopefully it will take care of that and I will pay better attention to the mentioned bullet points.

  15. says

    Testing is SO SO important. This may seem like a little thing, but if your contact form isn’t working, you’ve suddenly made your site look bad AND lost out on potential clients. And I Can’t tell you how many impressive-looking sites have forms that are so fancy they suddenly don’t work – the scroll bar is missing, spell-check is turned off, it doesn’t send a copy to my email…

    And all this could have been fixed by simply writing an test message and sending away! This is a great post and definitely timely!

  16. says

    @gemma @amber
    Rules (and standards for that matter) are made to be broken. I mean, what can you expect from a site that tries to break the norm, be somewhat original, when Twitter’s, Google’s or Facebook’s sites don’t validate. These companies have the budgets to make their sites validate.

    I have only three questions… Do you really want to spend an extra 100 hours or so to get a small site to validate? Just because you can? Is the client willing to pay an extra 3500$ so that the site is valid?

  17. says

    @Bogden who said it would cost the client any extra money to validate?? You should write valid code from the start and it should take you less than 30 seconds to fix any error. Leave the “show validation” setting on your web dev toolbar plugin on.

    You keep mentioning unique sites as an excuse not to validate, yet you’ve yet to give a good example. Sites like Google don’t validate because they choose not too. That doesmt mean you should follow their lead. No one said they were the epitome of web dev.

  18. says

    @amber
    You’re still missing my point. Starting a site with the “It must validate mindset” directly limits your possibilities. I don’t have seconds thoughts when a great idea pops in mind, idea that can be achieved with invalid markup only. I stick with it. I don’t try to make it validate (loose time & money). I choose not to validate, just like the Twitter etc chose also.

    I don’t keep the “show validation” setting on my web dev toolbar plugin because I normally right valid code without any visual helpers or validation tools.

    The reason I haven’t given any links yet is because I don’t have a bookmarks folder “Awesome sites that don’t validate”, but I bookmarked this post and as soon as I stumble on a new one, I’ll link it in here.

    Oh, and I disagree, sometimes validating a complex and twisted design, while making it work the same on a lot of browsers is hard. What would you choose then? A valid markup over a certain browser , or an invalid markup and a perfectly working version on that particular browser as well. And don’t tell me you’ve never hit this situation…

  19. Daza says

    Nice article, although I had to wait more than 30 secs for hte thing to load, and even then I had to reload it to mak eit load properly. So number one on the list made me laugh.

  20. says

    @Bogdan Pop,

    I disagree that standards are meant to be broken. Standards weren’t created for people to break. If they were then it would be pointless having them in the first place.

    The challenge isn’t just to come up with a visually pleasing, usable and accessible design that doesn’t look like many other designs out there.

    It is to create a visually pleasing, usable and accessible design that isn’t a carbon copy of popular designs out there, whilst adhering to standards. If you can’t do this then perhaps you are in the wrong job.

    What you design in your own time, whether or not it validates or adheres to standards is your own business. But we’re talking about being paid to work as a web designer/developer, where in many cases, you cannot be so dismissive of standards in the name of creating so called original design work, because for many, it wouldn’t be acceptable, both from a professional and legal point of view.

  21. says

    Page load speeds is the most major disaster a website can experience. Most people won’t wait a few seconds for the site to load, and will exit out of it.

    I’d also like to add poorly designed websites to the list. Poorly designed as in horrible color schemes can present a major disaster.

  22. says

    @Bogdan Pop – Sorry, disagree 100% on validation. The only exception I’ll make for my work is being forced to use other’s work that doesn’t validate. I work for a news organization that forces me to use some of their code. So, our site never validates.

    Once I started following Amber, I began to understand why validation is so important (for the reasons she mentioned above).

    Also, it doesn’t need to take 100 hours to fix. If you create it right the first time or validate as you go, it’s actually pretty easy. You learn how to create projects correctly from the get go.

  23. says

    @Bogdan Pop,

    As for Facebook, when I ran their site through the validator over at w3.org, I found that the validator kept going to the mobile version of Facebook (the mobile doctype), and threw up 13 errors. I couldn’t get it to check the normal version for some reason. Certainly it invalidates the code when checking it with the XHTML Mobile Profile 1.0 doctype. I don’t use this doctype so I can’t comment.

    According to the validator, Twitter is using HTML 5. I’m not surprised it doesn’t validate at the moment.

    But anyone using HTML4 or XHTML (strict doctype) should not need to use invalid code for any kind of site.

  24. says

    @Gemma: “I disagree that standards are meant to be broken. Standards weren’t created for people to break.”
    Do that and innovation stops!

    @everyone
    I was not saying the coding a valid markup was hard, or that I do not do it for me or my clients. Like I previously said, I write valid markup without the need of checking it with a validator if I want; I was simply saying that no kitty will die if you choose to go outside the box and disregard standards all together.

    @jerry
    You say you disagree about ditching validation, but you work for an organization that has a site that never validates. If you’re such a big advocate for standards why don’t you fix the issue?

  25. says

    @Bogdan Pop

    I have come to the conclusion that you’re just lazy or you’re not that experienced (both?), or you didn’t read, “What you design in your own time, whether or not it validates or adheres to standards is your own business.” followed by, “But we’re talking about being paid to work as a web designer/developer, where in many cases, you cannot be so dismissive of standards in the name of creating so called original design work, because for many, it wouldn’t be acceptable, both from a professional and legal point of view.”

    ^^

  26. says

    @Gemma
    Oh no I read that, but I didn’t see the connection to the topic of the article. Is there any? Does not validating a markup make a site look bad? I don’t think so. Does not validating a markup make a developer look unprofessional? Only if they can’t do better (hint: incapable).

    How did you come up with the conclusion that I am not that experienced? (that comes from someone who says that “Twitter is using HTML 5. I’m not surprised it doesn’t validate at the moment”) . Did you not know that HTML5 can be valid?

    Oh boy…

  27. says

    @Bogdan Pop,

    “Oh no I read that, but I didn’t see the connection to the topic of the article. Is there any? ”

    I mentioned it because of what you were saying about validation, which is a part of the standards we have. It is relevant. See in the article where it says: “Especially when it comes to making the site consistent across browsers, validating can be a major, major help. Plus, it really doesn’t take any good developer extra time to do, and it means your site is less likely to have issues when browsers and code standards are updated.”

    “Does not validating a markup make a site look bad? I don’t think so.”

    That’s a subjective thing. I think it does. Will it stop me from using the site? Not unless it stops me from doing what I need to do, in my chosen browser, Chrome. If I’m required to use the site in Firefox or Opera or flippin’ IE because I can’t do what I need to do in Chrome, then I leave the site and go elsewhere, and I curse whoever built it.

    “Does not validating a markup make a developer look unprofessional? Only if they can’t do better (hint: incapable).”

    Again, that’s somewhat subjective. I often check the source code on interesting sites, for learning purposes. If the HTML is invalid, I either suspect the developer is incapable, or he is just lazy. Or, he was forced to work with some crappy piece of markup inherited from someone else. But, any developer I hire has certain expectations to live up to, which I mentioned earlier. Also, if a developer is capable of using valid markup then there is no reason for him not to do it at all, not if he is aware of the limitations of designing for web – which comes with experience.

    “How did you come up with the conclusion that I am not that experienced?”

    Here’s the contradiction I saw in your comments. You claim you can write valid markup without having to run it through a validator – which suggests on the surface that you’re experienced in writing markup,

    Here it is: “I don’t keep the “show validation” setting on my web dev toolbar plugin because I normally right valid code without any visual helpers or validation tools.”

    So why do you have a problem with structuring “innovative” sites using valid markup? HTML is not difficult, as you should know. It is used for structure, and that is the easiest part of building a website compared to presentation and functionality. I guess you are referring to structure as you mentioned markup, which is (X)HTML, and is used for structure. You were not talking about CSS and Javascript here, otherwise you would have mentioned these. So, it’s clear to me you’re either:

    1) not thinking outside of the box in terms of structure (which is pretty lazy if you’re experienced),

    2) treating web design too much like print design (it smacks of inexperience – but this tends to fall under CSS more than (X)HTML),

    3) just inexperienced in general, which suggests to me that you lied about being able to write markup without having to use a validator.

    So, which is it? Hmm?

    “(that comes from someone who says that “Twitter is using HTML 5. I’m not surprised it doesn’t validate at the moment”) . Did you not know that HTML5 can be valid?”

    It is true that HTML5 can validate. But it’s still pretty new, so I’m not surprised Twitter’s latest redesign doesn’t validate. Even the validator lists the HTML5 doctype as being experimental. Many developers with years of experience are still learning a lot about HTML5 – just look on web design forums and blogs to see the evidence in the form of articles/tuts/discussions.

    In time, there will be a point when there won’t be a real reason not to have it validate, as we become more experienced with it. Just like it is now with HTML4 and XHTML.

    And your implication is correct, I’m not experienced with HTML5. I am with HTML4 and XHTML. Doesn’t stop me from buying a book to learn about the basics of HTML5, as I did. I won’t use HTML5 very much though, just like I don’t use XHTML for every single project I do, simply because if HTML4 is sufficient then there is no reason for me to use anything else.

  28. says

    BP- I have to work with a CMS that was created by our corporate programmers. They actually created their own programming language and built the cms/site around that.

    I create special projects, apps and pages that I can code how I want.

    My apps go into their CMS pages. However, I can also build pages/sites off of the main CMS.

    I’d give anything to be able to change it, but such is life, I guess.

  29. says

    @gemma
    1) not thinking outside of the box in terms of structure (which is pretty lazy if you’re experienced)
    This is not true. Moreover, I’ve never said to a client this (graphic design) has to be changed because it cannot be implemented (while thinking the markup implications of a design). That’s because most layouts, however fancy they may be can be coded with valid code.

    2) treating web design too much like print design (it smacks of inexperience – but this tends to fall under CSS more than (X)HTML)
    This isn’t true either. I have little experience with print design and I have print designers that design their sites using print techniques and want them coded after that, adhering to print rules (this is especially for typography: font, size, measure, etc)

    3) just inexperienced in general, which suggests to me that you lied about being able to write markup without having to use a validator.
    Do you really think inexperienced people would even consider raising up contradictory points, risking to turn everyone against themselves? It would be pure suicide on their behalf.

    Let me see if you agree with this:
    Validation is just an all-encompassing checker. It does test for markup errors, but it does not point out bad practices, accessibility issues, etc.
    So what is more important? a valid markup or one that puts accessibility beforehand and content as high up in the markup as possible?

  30. says

    @Bogdan Pop,

    “Do you really think inexperienced people would even consider raising up contradictory points, risking to turn everyone against themselves? It would be pure suicide on their behalf.”

    Ask yourself that one. I know plenty wouldn’t. So why are you doing it? lol

    “Let me see if you agree with this:
    Validation is just an all-encompassing checker. It does test for markup errors, but it does not point out bad practices, accessibility issues, etc.”

    Correct.

    “So what is more important? a valid markup or one that puts accessibility beforehand and content as high up in the markup as possible?”

    Neither is more important than the other. Standards includes all of these things, so why only one or the other? Why not all of these things? They are all important. You can validate your markup, make sure the site is as accessible as needed and make sure the content is as high up in the markup as possible – not one thing over the others.

    I have made my point about validation and standards. Some of us actually have work to do, so, have a good day! :-)

  31. says

    “Do you really think inexperienced people would even consider raising up contradictory points, risking to turn everyone against themselves? It would be pure suicide on their behalf.”
    >>Ask yourself that one. I know plenty wouldn’t. So why are you doing it? lol<<

    You clearly didn't get my point all together. It seems like we're speaking a completely different language using the same words. I was trying to point out that the inexperienced ones wouldn't have the knowledge required to come up with such questions.

    Why do I raise questions now and then? Because I don't take anything for granted. Apparently this is reason for laughter.

    Oh and web standards and web accessibility are two completely different things. Don't think of accessibility in terms of making a site to get along with screen readers. Accessibility is not just that. What if you make a site with valid markup and its user interface its completely crippled in IE 6, for example. That would make your site standards complaint, but on the other hand completely inaccessible to a certain amount of visitors.

    And don't give me almost nobody uses IE6, because there are niche websites that attract visitors mainly with IE6 or 7 and other old browsers.

  32. says

    @Bogdan Browser specific hacks weren’t created because of errors caused by validation. They were created because the browser didn’t interpret styles the same (CSS not HTML)

  33. says

    @amber
    I didn’t say that browser specific hacks were created because of errors caused by validation, God no. I said they were developed because browsers failed to render valid pages correctly.

  34. says

    I would just like to say thanks for this article. I’m just starting my LLC, and granted I do know a lot of this, it’s just nice to have some helpful reminders out there :)

  35. Nathan says

    It’s pretty funny that when I ran freelancefolder through the validator it came up with 64 errors and 23 warnings. I would say try to clean your own code up before you tell everyone that they should validate.

  36. says

    @Nathan…I’m pretty sure Amber’s a guest writer on Freelance Folder so I think it’s safe to say that you’re barking up the wrong tree when it comes to validating this site’s code. Just saying

  37. anonymousclod says

    “Not only will you waste a ton of time trying to get the site to conform in all browsers, you’ll have unnecessary images from the slice tool, bloated code and other nasties.”

    1. You can get tables to work in all browsers rather easily. In fact really, really easily.
    2. Slice tool? What quality front-end developer uses Photoshop’s slice tool output?
    3. Bloated code? Not really, nesting div upon div upon div can get just as bloated. Not to mention the endless browser hacks needed to support older browsers. In the end, the td tag is just a container as a div.
    4. What other nasties?

    The main reason not to use tables is semantics and the push for a semantic web. Technically from a structural standpoint, it really doesn’t make a difference what container you use.

    FYI, I am not advocating using tables for layouts, but your reasons for not using them aren’t really all that great. Sorry.

  38. says

    Hi Amber,

    BlogFront.org is committed to uphold the quality standards of blogging. We strive to maintain and promote only the most credible blogs in their respective fields.

    Spam blogs or “splogs” has been a problem for some time now and people are getting confused about which blog to trust.

    We would like to thank you for maintaining such a reputable blog. We know that it takes time, effort and commitment to keep such a blog and as such, we have added your blog as one of the top Careers Blogs.

    You can see your blog listed here: http://blogfront.org/careers/8

    You can also claim your BlogFront Top Blogs badge at http://blogfront.org/badges/careers

    Thank you for keeping your blog credible. Let’s keep the blog revolution alive!

    Maria Blanchard
    BlogFront.org
    Blog Revolucion

  39. says

    This is a really interesting article, I agree that it is well worth taking the time to check your html as the problem will always crop up somewhere else if you don’t. I can’t believe that anyone would put a site live without testing it, it really helps to make a check list and work through it every time.

  40. says

    One good way to tell if people are getting slow loading pages or javascript errors on your website is to check Google analytics for hits with “zero time spent on site”. This can indicate that the site failed to finish loading before the user clicked elsewhere.

  41. says

    When you get Facebook followers you will be ready to increase the website visitors on your supporter page, to your website and that will surely give you a great possibility to increase your sales. Social media can be really effective tool for the company if you use it properly. Some of the most common venues for organization currently are MySpace, Connected-in, Twitter and of program, Facebook. The most critical network at the moment is FB since it is the most visited a single.

Trackbacks

  1. [...] View the rest of my post on FreelanceFolder » Something Similiar: Creating A Custom eCommerce Theme in CoreCommerce Tweet About the author Amber Weinberg specializes in clean and semantic XHTML, CSS and WordPress development. She has over 10 years of coding experience and is pretty cool to work with. Amber is available for freelance work, so why not hire her for your next project? [...]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>