Some new ones

[Xagone]

Your stats are not the same as mine, here in Canada, IE6 and less are lower than 6% all togheter.

And thoses on IE6 know that pages may not work because most of them are forced to stay with that browser.

We got more hit from mobile browsers, so IPhone, BlackBerry and winmo or hp webos is more important to check

[Sgt.Nops]

Thats ok for private pages.
On most of my pages its still got 10% IE6 .
So if you don't check IE6 for commerciall pages you client possibly looses 10% of his customers.
Thats even worse if he uses Adwords to draw pepole to his page.

Btw. i still got 0.5% IE5
And still about 100 old netscape visitors  on some of the pages

[Xagone]

the only browser we dont check anymore is IE6

[Sgt.Nops]

@stefek
Here in Germany many peole like certificates so its often a good idea to validate.

You are right the CSS does not hurt serps. Did someone test if this templates are crossbrowser compatible?

Btw.  i am pretty sure that sooner or later searchengines will use at least something like Validation to evaluate the general quality of a page.

Its really good work, but it won't help the author to improve its work if the only thing we say is: "its all good".

[Stefek]

@Stefek
Have you ever tried to parse a non valid HTML document whith regular expressions to extract data ?
Missing end tags, incomplete tags, missing > and stuff like that make it a pain in the ass.

Do you think the google spider likes to run into buggy sites ?
It does not care about perfect validation but the validator helps alot to avoid most common bugs.

Non Valid CSS causes alot of display issues , so why not use valid CSS.

As webdesigners its our task to make pages that give good results on most browsers, and make it easy for searchengines to extract the data.

Hello, yes of course.
There are some important things to do on a site - but it all has its limitations.
For example: valid css may be a issue with some browsers, but I don't think that a spider will take this into account for the SERPs.
There are a lot of fancy stuff out there you'll never get through the css validator. So you'll need to take your own pros & cons into account.

Missing end tags, incomplete tags, missing > and stuff like that make it a pain in the ass.

As I said, this may be a real issue but it also depends on the purpose of your site.

But... I didn't say, that HTML validation is a stupid activity at all.
My statement was addressed the "CSS looks worse" part of the post.

- Just a few minor Problems whith validation nothing serious, you should fix em
- CSS looks worse

And again, it may be an issue but it doesn't harm your SERPs.

So if you ask me again: Nice pages!
Taking a robot (validator) to get some arguments for being critical is not part of my ambitions.

Regards,
Stefek

[Sgt.Nops]

@Stefek
Have you ever tried to parse a non valid HTML document whith regular expressions to extract data ?
Missing end tags, incomplete tags, missing > and stuff like that make it a pain in the ass.

Do you think the google spider likes to run into buggy sites ?
It does not care about perfect validation but the validator helps alot to avoid most common bugs.

Non Valid CSS causes alot of display issues , so why not use valid CSS.

As webdesigners its our task to make pages that give good results on most browsers, and make it easy for searchengines to extract the data.

[sparkdigital]

I like the first and third one! Well done...

Konrad

[Sokhim Sim]

Thanks for your solution.

[PurpleEdge]

https://forum.websitebaker.org/index.php/topic,19621.0.html

[Sokhim Sim]

Look cool,

so how to change extension: to .html? i did try to change it but it not working.

Thanks

[Stefek]

CSS looks worse

who cares except the validator?

[Sgt.Nops]

Nice pages, i especially like the first and the last design.
The second one looks too plain white for my taste.

Just a few minor Problems whith validation nothing serious, you should fix em
http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sinergia.ca%2F
http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.joellemalenfant.com%2F

CSS looks worse :
http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?profile=css21&warning=0&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.joellemalenfant.com%2F
http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?profile=css21&warning=0&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.profquebecplus.com%2Ffr%2Faccueil.html
http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?profile=css21&warning=0&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sinergia.ca%2F

[PurpleEdge]

Great impact from the big images!

WB is a great tool for these types of sites!

I'm having second thoughts about Flash, they don't work on iphones and ipads and for the first site in particular I would think that a few people would want to access this site using one of these devices?

[Stefek]

Very nice.

I mostly like the last one.

Very good work! Again!

Kind regards,
Stefek

[Xagone]

a Doctor (french) :
http://www.joellemalenfant.com/

Learning help school :
http://www.profquebecplus.com/

Technologie enterprise (french) :
http://www.sinergia.ca/