Why doesn't google.com validate?

Why doesn't google.com validate?

Adresses courriel de vos ami(e)s...
Envoyer cette vidéo par: Prise1 Hotmail Gmail Outlook ou Thunderbird...

Envoyée le mercredi 16 septembre 2009 12:37:31
par GoogleWebmasterHelp
Vue 70372 fois

4.3 / 5
80 vote(s)

Michael Thingmand from Denmark asks:

"Why doesn't google.com validate (according to W3C)?"

This video is part of a "Grab Bag" series in which Matt Cutts, head of Google's webspam team, answers questions from webmasters. We're not currently taking new video questions, so your best bet for getting an answer about webmaster-related search issues is to head to our help forum: http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/Webmasters?hl=en

facebook

Écrire votre commentaire ici...

pikilon

I think there is a logic flaw on the argument "we don't boost page that validates because almost everypage doesn't validate" 1. Validation is good for web 2. Validation take extra time/effort So shouldn't be google rewarding in some way (only a little) the sites that validate?
mercredi 07 mars 2012 05:30:22
dollieluc

awesome work =)) good job keep it up congrats
mardi 15 novembre 2011 00:41:39
AspenFlower17

dont read this because it acttually works.you will get kissed onthe nearest possible friday by the love of your live. tommorow will be the best day of your life.however if you dont post this comment to at least three videos you will die within to days.now youve started reading this so dont stop . this is so scary.put this on at least five videos in 143 minutes when your done press F6 and your lovers name will apeer on the screen in big letters.this is so scary cause it actually work
samedi 30 avril 2011 01:48:09
TimmmmCam

Fair enough I suppose, but it doesn't even have a closing html tag! That's just ugly.
lundi 20 décembre 2010 18:25:52
nuboy529

I don't think they validate when you park at corpoate headquaters either... jerks.
dimanche 07 novembre 2010 11:14:31
angadnadk

Why fix what ain't broken? The aim of standardizing markup is to have no implementation-based differences. If Google can do a good job at that, then there isn't any need for it to comply to a third party's standards, no matter how popular that third party be.
jeudi 02 septembre 2010 05:05:48
OBJECTlVITY

:: these idiots :: are now FORCING us to sign in, in order to change THAT STUPID mandatory background on google page ! They want us to sign in perhaps to trace OUR search ! who is SEARCHING WHAT. I do not see any other reason why they want to FORCE us to sign in in order to SEARCH !
jeudi 10 juin 2010 00:31:42
websitedesign4

The very point of the W3C is to make web content available to all users, regardless of platform or disability. By not validating and by not preferring sites that do, Google is culpable. Google, don't be evil! Net neutrality matters - so does code neutrality! Open standards are the most important, proprietary code will just make the job harder in the future....
mardi 02 février 2010 13:15:40
jarrod1937

Then you have other serious problems. I test all additions to my site across different platforms and browsers and browser versions (and sub-versions) and never had analytics code fail that badly...
jeudi 28 janvier 2010 16:04:45
2008stargate

better idear how about thay check the sponsered link more often it used to have a link to a pedophil site
jeudi 05 novembre 2009 17:32:10
xdragus

If you check any of the big companies...many have 150+ errors. Perhaps it means that W3C is just a big joke on us that follow it to the bone.
lundi 19 octobre 2009 16:03:12
ParisVegaMedia

Wow... I'm kinda surprised at how casually this issue was addressed. Is it really that hard for Google to see the benefits of a standards based internet? I wonder if they would see things differently if they would have been the ones to set the standard for HTML?
dimanche 11 octobre 2009 23:25:03

« [1] 2 3 »