C
cwdjrxyz
The main Google entry page at http:www.google.com changes from day to
day depending on the top page image used, etc. However it is fairly
short and uncluttered compared to many major organization web pages.
To be specific, I thus will refer to the July 4, 2010, page.
If you take the page to the w3c html validator, it gets validated as
html5. However even for this short page, there are 37 validation
errors. Most of these errors would also be errors in html 4. The code
looks like something out of the 90s. But it gets worse. If you try to
validate at w3c as css, you find that no style sheet is found. However
it does complain about 4 XML links.
There is much to be admired about some of the things Google does.
However I consider the code on their entry page a mess, one of the
worst I have seen on a major organization page. I also wonder why they
use javascript. Is this one of those rare cases where server side
script such as php will not work.
day depending on the top page image used, etc. However it is fairly
short and uncluttered compared to many major organization web pages.
To be specific, I thus will refer to the July 4, 2010, page.
If you take the page to the w3c html validator, it gets validated as
html5. However even for this short page, there are 37 validation
errors. Most of these errors would also be errors in html 4. The code
looks like something out of the 90s. But it gets worse. If you try to
validate at w3c as css, you find that no style sheet is found. However
it does complain about 4 XML links.
There is much to be admired about some of the things Google does.
However I consider the code on their entry page a mess, one of the
worst I have seen on a major organization page. I also wonder why they
use javascript. Is this one of those rare cases where server side
script such as php will not work.