Working together for standards The Web Standards Project

I did a small comparative analysis of markup practices at several major search engines. It’s interesting to note that only one engine is using valid markup and CSS layouts, and that would be MSN. Close behind is AOL, whose validation problems are mostly related to ampersands not being escaped, and HotBot, who have a few easily corrected errors.

Engine Markup Language Table Layouts or CSS? Markup Validation
Alta Vista Presentational HTML, no DOCTYPE Tables Does Not Validate
AOL (beta) XHTML 1.0 Transitional CSS Does Not Validate (mostly due to ampersands not being escaped)
Excite Presentational HTML, HTML 4.01 DOCTYPE Tables Does Not Validate
Google HTML, no DOCTYPE Tables Does Not Validate
HotBot XHTML 1.0 Strict CSS Does Not Validate but only a few conformance errors
Lycos Presentational HTML, no DOCTYPE Tables Does Not Validate
MSN XHTML 1.0 Strict CSS Validates
Yahoo! HTML 4.01 Transitional with presentational and proprietary elements and attributes in use, partial DOCTYPE CSS Does Not Validate

With the exception of Yahoo! which I know has progressive developers examining markup issues, it’s curious to think that many search engines and portals, which tend to be highly trafficked, haven’t been exposed to the benefits of Web standards.

This entry cross-posted to take your comments.

Return to top

Post a Reply

Comments are closed.

All of the entries posted in WaSP Buzz express the opinions of their individual authors. They do not necessarily reflect the plans or positions of the Web Standards Project as a group.

This site is valid XHTML 1.0 Strict, CSS | Get Buzz via RSS or Atom | Colophon | Legal