I've seen this in the footer of various websites, most of them non-technical websites. Some websites go even further and include a W3C badge stating the fact. I don't see how this can be of any help to the targeted audience.
A:
It doesn't, in my opinion many webdesign agencies put it as a sign of quality in the site. Sometimes make a good site XHTML compliant is not an easy task.
victor hugo
2009-06-28 00:20:27
+7
A:
It's a badge of pride. I don't necessarily think I agree with plastering sites with validation iconography, but I do firmly believe in coding to standards. The web is a much less difficult place to work than it used to be because of the hard work of the W3C et al.
Brian
2009-06-28 00:22:27
+16
A:
Honestly, I think it's just done to brag. "Hey, look, my website uses valid XHTML!" It doesn't really serve any purpose other than to show that it was well coded.
musicfreak
2009-06-28 00:22:27
It doesn't even show that it was well-coded, as you can often click through to the validators and see errors. It's just pretentious noise.
Roger Pate
2010-04-28 21:35:57
I often click "valid XHTML" badges on sites just for curiosity. I'd say that 2 out of 3 pages turn out be invalid or not well-formed. This is sad because theoretically browser should discard such pages. The whole situation just shows that people don't actually care about code validity nor understand its importance.
jasso
2010-08-30 15:11:22
+18
A:
I can think of a few possible reasons:
It may be a marketing tool. "Look, we code to appropriate standards!" This could apply to the individual who designed the site (and might include it in their portfolio), even if the company as a whole is non-technical.
It could be a means of spreading awareness about XHTML, et al. "You should code to appropriate standards, too!"
It might improve the perception of quality for the site as a whole (and maybe the company's products, by association). I don't really think this is particularly likely, but some marketing departments might.
As others have noted, it could just be a point of pride for the web designer.
John Hyland
2009-06-28 00:37:05
Although this answer may suggest this is a good practice, I would consider it being a rather lame (no offence if some of you use it) way of showing that you can do something you should anyway, really.
Michal M
2009-07-07 18:22:51
Oh, I don't disagree. In most cases, there's probably more benefit to keeping the design clean and uncluttered. Even on a site for a web design company, I think I'd just mention standards compliance in the text rather than add extra badges or whatever.
John Hyland
2009-07-07 21:30:10
+4
A:
In most cases, this badge is a link to an auto-validation task ran against the referring site. This is an invitation for the audience to scrutinize the quality of your work.
Jonathan Sampson
2009-06-28 00:43:05
Ha! I just scrutinised the quality of my own work and found 111 errors. When you add blog plugins, remember to check their markup...
robertc
2009-06-28 01:30:27
@robertc, in that case you're scrutinizing other people's work - that is, if the problems come from their plugins ;)
Jonathan Sampson
2009-06-28 01:51:55
+4
A:
It doesn't serve any useful purpose. Just because a site is xhtml compliant doesn't mean it is well coded. It just means the developer cares whether or not the site is xhtml compliant or not.
JohannesH
2009-06-28 00:46:34
+2
A:
I'm fascinated by what people put in the footer. All kinds of junk down there. Sometimes there is even navigation that I wish were at the top of the page. Example:
Nosredna
2009-06-28 00:56:54
A:
People generally put a valid at the bottom to display that their website is complaint with the W3C standards for building websites. If a website isn't working correctly and hasn't got a valid link or image at the bottom then its probably been poorly written. By validating your website through the W3C shows that you have correctly coded your pages.
Magnum
2009-07-07 13:17:04
+1
A:
It usually means there's some JavaScript behind that adds target attributes on links after the page has loaded.
Ionuț G. Stan
2009-07-07 13:21:32
+2
A:
I'd add two more to John Hyland's answer:
- By stating that the page/site is well-formed, it may state that it can be more easily parsed by third-parties.
- For re-usable content (e.g. Creative Commons licensing), it informs that the code may be copy/pasted or included without breaking W3C compliance.
streetpc
2009-07-07 13:26:32
+2
A:
I've also seen sites with W3C badge who actually do not pass validation.
User
2009-07-07 13:34:22
A:
The W3C HTML validator and CSS validator contain linking code to display banners that markup and CSS are valid.
It's mainly to tell you that the authors have actually bothered to make sure that the XHTML and CSS are valid.
Unfortunately, being syntax error-free doesn't make it logic-error free.
R. Bemrose
2009-07-07 18:19:17
A:
Short answer: You do not NEED it on a web page.
Any reason that it was put there is subjective to the author of the page and does not really concern you.
Casey
2010-07-29 22:04:25