[quote=“ILCisDEAD,post:132,topic:26164"”]
I certainly understand the separation, I’ll definitely have to look into the site degrading gracefully. Gives me something else to do when i’m bored and want to make a quick site for a friend or someone. lol
assuming
http://revision3.com/ when disabled is bad…
http://www.nyspeed.com/forums/index.php is worse
but something like
http://www.tomshardware.com/ seems to maintain the structure quite well… but, its ugly…
http://www.sportsline.com/ just all hell breaks loose…
what am i looking for?
[/quote]
Revision 3 is coded correctly. The document breaks down to its core elements in a linear fashion (According to how they are placed in the doc flow). Its readable, you can distinguish between the different types of titles and the paragraph content, the nav is a list, etc. <br><br>Some high profile sites that have adopted web-standards include wired.com, espn.com, gm.com, etc. They are converting by the dozens.
Actually, ESPN and Sportsline are perfect examples, ESPN is coded with web-standards and Sportsline is table based old school html.