# Logo Vote **URL:** \ **Category:** NYSpeed Off Topic\ **Created:** [March 20, 2007, 12:39pm UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/logo-vote/26164 "2007-03-20T12:39:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 134
**Author:** ![dozr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/41988e/32.png) [@dozr](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/dozr)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2007, 4:15pm UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/logo-vote/26164/134 "2007-03-21T16:15:40Z")
[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/](http://revision3.com/) when disabled is bad… [http://www.nyspeed.com/forums/index.php](http://www.nyspeed.com/forums/index.php) is worse but something like [http://www.tomshardware.com/](http://www.tomshardware.com/) seems to maintain the structure quite well… but, its ugly… [http://www.sportsline.com/](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. \\Some high profile sites that have adopted web-standards include [wired.com](http://wired.com), [espn.com](http://espn.com), [gm.com](http://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. --- _[View the full topic](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/logo-vote/26164)._