Is your HTML and/or CSS W3-Valid?

[Jonathan]

http://w3.org <-- HTML and CSS Validators.

Who here has 100% perfect, valid HTML and/or CSS?
I have valid both, have three days of constent
adjustment, and several replacment navigation menus

[Frank Hagan]

I answered that both were, but the truth is, they are only in their final form. Getting them there sometimes takes me a while.

I find when I use templates I have a harder time. I'm using pure CSS techniques more and more now, including my newest one (which I have NOT run through the validator yet), which has "graphical" menus with highlights when you mouse-over. It also is accessible: if the user has their browser set to override the style, the content is presented in the same order as when viewing the page with styles enabled. The roll-over highlighted graphical menu thingys turn into bulleted lists, and the content from all of the left column is presented first, then the content from the main column.

A page designed using table cells, when read by a blind person's browser, for instance, will present the information just as it appears in your HTML source. That can make many pages unintelligible.

So why do I do this? There's really no good reason, other than I find it a challenge to try and develop good looking pages without tables (except for actual tabular data!)

[DesignURL]

Just ran mine through: designurl.com

CSS was fine, html was missing the !DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC, which I added in.

I've been using Style Master 3.5 for my CSS. Finding it to be quite a powerful tool to compliment Dreamweaver MX.

[Buddha]

If I have time then I validate both the HTML & CSS but otherwise I just make sure it works in IE and Mozilla. Mozilla pretty much forces you to write half way deciet HTML & CSS. Usually my breaks are with things like <tbody> or forgotten ALT=.