W3C Blog

Well done, the site is much more pleasant to use.

Congratulations! Nice work!

Looks great, good work on the update! The site is much nicer to use now.

I do wonder at the class naming scheme though - seems to use presentational names a fair bit, eg: h3 class="h4 tPadding0 bPadding0 summary" Was that legacy code or was there a particular reason for those names?

Regarding the presentation names for classes: I've found a mix of "semantic classes" and "presentation classes" has made the css a bit easier to maintain, and the templates a bit easier to manage. I think Nicole Sullivan would be able to say a lot about the grid approach; I found it very useful to be able to dissociate the (grid) layout from other semantics.

It seems you still have debug info in comments in the source page f.i : @h h3 class=h4 is directly coming from Nicole Sullivan's OOCSS recommendation

It's nice to look and feel. :)

really good, love it :)

I can't see any use of WAI-ARIA landmark roles. I know ARIA is still a working draft, but given that browser and assistive technology vendors are actively implementing and improving support, would this not have been a good opportunity to demonstrate the accessibility benefits?

The sites nice.

Shooting yourself in the foot... no shooting yourself in the face = YES with the invalid CSS. If everyone else can manage to get Valid CSS then SO CAN YOU!

"Because of known interoperability issues, we have accepted to use CSS that does not validate with the CSS validator. Over time we hope to evolve towards valid CSS." ITS THE DAY TO DAY PROBLEM OF THE AVERAGE WEBSITE DESIGNER SO LIVE WITH THE RULES YOU'VE SET AND FIX THE CODE!

The INVALID HTML CODE in your examples within the documents MUST BE CHANGED, what the hell are you playing at? I expected with the update of your website you'd fix this, but obviously NOT

NO Text IS NOT VALID HTML SO REMOVE IT OR ADJUST YOUR VALIDATOR/STANDARDS.

You are supposed to be setting an example.. so for gods sake do it, no wonder people are no longer taking you serious!

Adam King #WebStandards #Nazi

Regarding the use of WAI-ARIA, one reason we've not started to use extensively is that it is not yet a standard. I am pretty sure that we will begin to incorporate it over time.

It IS a lot nicer than the old one, no doubt about that. That said, did anyone else felt a heavy sense of irony when they read "Over time we hope to evolve towards valid CSS."?

Looks great! My father would have been impressed.

This is really funny that the new website does not even validate to WAI-A

Fails on:- 12.4 Associate labels explicitly with their controls. 13.1 Clearly identify the target of each link. 13.2 Provide metadata to add semantic information to pages and sites.

Nor have you clearly defined the language of the document. +Invalid CSS

And you guys are supposed to be the web standards folk? I seriously facepalm, even more reason for Cowboys to ignore Web Standards now.

/sigh

What next, you rebuild the site in tables? And the invalid HTML in the examples has still not been addressed.

Why should professional web designers use web standards when you yourself do not?

Adam, regarding your comments about accessibility, we've worked hard to ensure that the home page satisfied WCAG 2 (AA). Naturally, if there are errors we will fix them because ensuring the site is accessible is very important.

You've not provided a URI to the page or pages you are talking about, so I can't be sure. Also, please do not assume that because there are glitches in the site that we don't care about using the standards. Of course we know that people expect W3C to use the standards, and we work hard to do so. So I'd like to ask for you help in identifying and fixing what we may not yet have done correctly.

Not bad. Don't start slacking though. Keep working on it if you want to stay at the forefront of the global web design community. There's so much creative talent out there these days...

Over time we hope to evolve towards valid CSS

How will that be possible when much of the invalid CSS is catering to non-evolving browsers like IE?

Technicalities aside, it's a very nice design!

Hi James. The older browsers may not change, but we can drop our support for them over time.

Great! from long time i was expecting for new usability implitaiton on the world king site.

Excellent work guys!

Hi,

I think I found a spelling mistake in your http://www.w3.org/Status.html page.

I could be wrong, but should "Validation, lint" actually read: "Validation, links" ?

I do find your navigation confusing. I had a difficult time finding your CSS and HTML validation pages. Some improvements needed here, I feel.

Best wishes,

Robin New Zealand.

Hi Robin,

"lint" is intended, in particular in the context of "charlint," a character normalization tool: http://www.w3.org/International/charlint/

As to finding the validators, they appear on the home page on the right hand side. In general they will be available above the fold, but right now we have our developer gathering prominently featured; that will go away after 6 November and the validators will again move up the page.

_ Ian

From an artistic point of view ,the new design is nice and fresh and probably long overdue.

From a usability and mission point of view I'm not really that happy with the new design.

I really like to use and recommend the online validators, and found it of great value for them to be up front where their presence made them both easy to use, and easy to promote.

I sorta get this mental image of someone standing there saying "we are the folks that design web authoring standards" while they try to inconspicuously push the validators in the closet with one leg while grinning sheepishly.

So now with the standards buried , the validators buried I guess it's time to fill the front page with promotions for Adobe, and perhaps next Microsoft's latest browser offering, and self aggrandizing calender notes saying "look at how busy we are" instead of focusing on the tools and reference materials that most folks came for.

I would recommend taking most of that chatter on the front page and sticking it under magazine.w3.org and keeping the www.w3.org focus on the gospel of the standards and the tools to allow people to comply with them.

Sad thing that a standards site would find a new paint job so important to release that actually putting their money where their mouth is took a back seat.

Hi Dr. Clue,

As I've mentioned to others, the validators will move up the page again after next week. Our current big meeting has pushed them down temporarily. The will be above the fold 95% of the time.

Hope that helps,

_ Ian

Well it's a very nice job, I seek the beta version for a while now, and I'm impressed to see the final version. Looks nice, modern with a lots of little things that save time and help navigation. Nicole Sullivan and all the team have done a good job! (and thanks to Nicole I learnt how to use object oriented CSS for the next website version :) )

Nicolas Chevallier, CEO of Allogarage

Well it's a very nice job, I seek the beta version for a while now, and I'm impressed to see the final version. Looks nice, modern with a lots of little things that save time and help navigation. Nicole Sullivan and all the team have done a good job! (and thanks to Nicole I learnt how to use object oriented CSS for the next website version :) )

Nicolas Chevallier, CEO of Allogarage

That's very usable !

Looks nice, but I cannot find the test suites anymore (e.g. the 3.0 selector tests or the CSS 2.1 tests).

Are these not available anymore?

Robert,

The site redesign didn't touch the test suites, so they should still be there, probably linked from the CSS WG home page. There are new places where links to test suites would probably also be helpful. Can you tell me what path you followed looking for them?

_ Ian

cool, i like the look

Great! from long time i was expecting for new usability implitaiton on the world king site.

Excellent work guys!

Domuz Gribi