Flash and standards
- Started
- Last post
- 8 Responses
- Spilt-Milk
So I built my lovely standards based site and it validates and all that. I put me flash navigation in and now it throws up a bunch of errors on the validator.
Anyone know how I include flash in an html page without getting validation errors?
Thanks - im up against it here
- ********0
- Spilt-Milk0
I saw that - I'd love to find a way that meant you didn't have to genreate a flash loader.
Ta though
- DonnieTV0
F*ck it!
- Spilt-Milk0
I feel that.
Looked at that Satay thing and just ignored the flash loader and used this and it seems to work in PC IE5-6/Firefox/Opera
- sparker0
validation != standards.
validation is a benchmark to ensure you're using proper markup.
standards has more to do with the way you build your site both technically and conceptially than whether it validates against w3 spec.
if you follow the concept of separation (style, content, scripting), use xhtml correctly (ie. no tables for layout) and possibly even use semantic layout then your site is 'standards' compliant.
just because the flash source doesn't validate doesn't mean your work is wrong.
:)
- imakedesign0
sparker very well said but people seem to have an obsession with putting on that little banner at the bottom of their pages.
so for these people this should be of use:
- sparker0
oh, and i agree that support and advertisement of the cause is a good thing.
but people shouldn't cling to things.
it amazes me how dependent some people become.
it is like people who can only use dreamweaver. why cling to a certain program? xhtml is editable in any text editor...xhtml is a markup...it is independent of any platform, system or ide. so, then why do people concentrate on learning software instead of the markup?
it is the same with standards. since it has gained in popularity...people cling to the notion that the validator is gospel.
well, it's not. the w3 isn't even the only validator out there.
and, in the end...a little link to a validator is completely worthless to an end user.
not only will they not understand what they're looking at...but it distracts them from your site.
a better solution is to write a "about this site's standards" page which users can go to and read the how and why you built it that way.
case study style information is more relevant to a user than validator output.
:)
i'm a standards zealot...but even i think little links and buttons to the w3 are trite.
besides, it adds few bytes to your markup weight...doesn't that defeat using standards? you know, adding useless fluff to the site?
- Spilt-Milk0
Don't worry about the debate. I just wantna get this sucka out the door so I can go to the pub this evening wit me peeps.
Couldn't give a f%$ck about validation. It's just the client being funny.