The Free Site Validator is for all y'all web designers who are tired of putting each and every page through the W3C Markup Validation Service. Enter the URL you'd like checked, start the report and you'll soon have every page of the site examined for valid markup and link rot. It also uses OpenID so you might already have an account! [via 456 Berea Street] [more inside]
posted by sciurus on Oct 30, 2008 - 13 comments

ArsTechnica is reporting on the practice of altering and editing web-traffic enroute from the server to your client/browser. Is your ISP, work or connection path altering your requested documents? Find out here.
posted by loquacious on Apr 16, 2008 - 18 comments

CSS Trappist Monastery. Like the Zen Garden, but without any images (other than the "chosen twelve").
posted by brownpau on Feb 13, 2006 - 29 comments

IE in bug fix mode? Then fix the bugs! As was mentioned here before, MS is discontinuing the free version of IE for Mac, and offering it only as part of the MSN service instead. They also appear to be doing the same with IE for Windows. The Web Standards Project is demanding that they include standards bugs in the list they are going to fix, because MS has always advertised IE as standards-compliant.
posted by setmajer on Jun 27, 2003 - 32 comments

Cynthia Says™ is a web content accessibility validation solution, it is designed to identify errors in design related to Section 508 standards and the WCAG guidelines. The main purpose of this portal is to educate web site developers in the development Web Based content that is accessible to all. Cynthia runs more tests than Bobby and is free. I think the site itself fails the accessiblity test, 'cause it doesn't have "WCAG" in an <abbr> tag, nonetheless it's a good tool. [via zeldman].
posted by riffola on Mar 18, 2003 - 2 comments

99.9% of Websites Are Obsolete An excerpt from an upcoming book by Mr. Zeldman in which he continues to argue the practice of standards compliance - "Held up as a Holy Grail of professional development practice, backward compatibility sounds good in theory. But the cost is too high and the practice has always been based on a lie." I enjoy his writing but he seems to be repeating himself as usual. Still, it is a good argument: where do we focus our priorities for future development - pure standards compliant CSS models, backwards compatibility, or somewhere in between? I know this has been discussed before but thought it postworthy due to the new book and all.
posted by poopy on Sep 6, 2002 - 110 comments

The Web Standards Project is back, now in easy-to-swallow blog form. Stand up straight! Close that HTML tag! And wipe that silly browser off your hard drive, mister! And the other one.
posted by gazingus on Jun 11, 2002 - 17 comments

The Web Standards Project calls it quits, for now.
posted by gazingus on Dec 13, 2001 - 77 comments

W3C and Fee-based Standards for the Web The last call review period is over today. If you have an opinion that needs to be heard by the W3C, get it to them now. At last check, they had received 396 comments. What's your take on the proposed policy change? Will the W3C survive?
posted by bragadocchio on Sep 30, 2001 - 1 comment

Take that, web-standards maniacs! "After Windows XP is launched in October, users will be directed to download a plug-in from Microsoft's Web site (www.microsoft.com) to make Java-based programs work. Without this step, 'any Web page that contains Java applications will not run -- it will be a dead page'" Put that in your "this page viewable in v5.0 browsers or later" crackpipe and smoke it. (Shamelessly swiped from that Other Site...)
posted by jfuller on Jul 18, 2001 - 21 comments

Nokia Takes a Step Towards Web Standards I was incredibly impressed this morning to have someone send me this link. It looks like Nokia phones of the future will use XHTML (My guess is XHTML Basic) + CSS. I hope it supports media typing as well.
posted by bkdelong on Mar 26, 2001 - 1 comment

Zeldman responds to the the many concerns people have expressed over the WaSP's recent Browser Upgrade Campaign. Read it if you love the web.
posted by ericost on Mar 7, 2001 - 6 comments

A spectre is haunting the Web - the spectre of standards. Jeffery Zeldman takes a bold step and stops supporting "bad browsers". Will the Web follow?
posted by geir on Feb 22, 2001 - 47 comments

Time to toss the 3.0 and 4.0s in the trash - and I'm not talking about GPA. The biggest problem for Web developers right now is the prevalence of old browsers that don't fully support standards like HTML 4.0 and CSS 1 & 2. Now that we have at least 3 browsers that can handle most of these standards, why not encourage a move from the less standard browsers to ones that will allow us to more easily design sites. Write once view anywhere....Woo hoo!
posted by bkdelong on Feb 16, 2001 - 50 comments

what will be supported now that browsers are a-changin' again? handy resource from a Netscape product manager.
posted by patricking on Nov 18, 2000 - 0 comments

Proprietary URLs? How many of these non-standard prefixes does your system support?

Just off the top of my head with the programs I have running right now, I can handle nap: aim: hotline: and a few others, not counting all the ones built into my browser.

More inside...
posted by anildash on Sep 15, 2000 - 2 comments

The CSS Anarchists Cookbook How to ruin a designers pride and joy with with one simple file
posted by Foaf on Jul 31, 2000 - 4 comments

More from the WSP on IE5.5, "a browser that strikes out on complete support for any standard." Things are getting ugly.
posted by ericost on Apr 12, 2000 - 3 comments

The Web Standards Project blasts Microsoft's "arrogant" break with standards in IE 5.5/Windows Edition. Please read the press release and, if you agree, post it to your favorite mailing lists and news groups. This must not stand.
posted by Zeldman on Apr 10, 2000 - 5 comments