Website Validation Showdown - Results and Findings for All Sites

Out of 745 website home page documents being monitored, here are the Top 10 Lists. These Top 10 Lists are dynamic and change based on actual numbers during our last Group Update as of 2010-10-23 06:06.

The Top 10 Lists for

Top 10 Most HTML/XHTML Errors

№ Domain Twitter DOCTYPE ERR WAR CSS ALT ID Verified UVR H
1 Newsday.com @newsday XHTML 1.0 Strict 1097 821 209 5 5 2010-10-22 10:17
2 ineedhits.com XHTML 1.0 Transitional 904 37 9 37 0 2010-10-20 11:53
3 LATimes.com @LATimes HTML 4.01 Transitional 832 259 306 40 14 2010-10-22 10:12
4 Philly.com XHTML 1.0 Transitional 783 415 36 46 19 2010-10-22 10:22
5 TheNextWeb.com @TheNextWeb HTML5 639 9 470 0 0 2010-10-23 05:51
6 WashingtonPost.com @washingtonpost XHTML 1.0 Transitional 613 429 178 19 7 2010-10-23 05:58
7 OCRegister.com @OC_Register XHTML 1.0 Transitional 587 278 50 60 111 2010-10-22 10:20
8 SocialMediaTrader.com XHTML 1.0 Transitional 585 541 24 24 0 2010-10-23 05:39
9 ScottMonty.com XHTML 1.0 Transitional 545 433 21 71 0 2010-10-22 10:29
10 WebInkNow.com XHTML 1.0 Transitional 512 544 26 54 0 2010-10-23 05:59
Back to Previous

Top 10 Most HTML/XHTML Warnings

№ Domain Twitter DOCTYPE ERR WAR CSS ALT ID Verified UVR H
1 Newsday.com @newsday XHTML 1.0 Strict 1097 821 209 5 5 2010-10-22 10:17
2 TargetMarketingMag.com XHTML 1.0 Transitional 394 752 73 1 0 2010-10-23 06:06
3 WebInkNow.com XHTML 1.0 Transitional 512 544 26 54 0 2010-10-23 05:59
4 SocialMediaTrader.com XHTML 1.0 Transitional 585 541 24 24 0 2010-10-23 05:39
5 ScottMonty.com XHTML 1.0 Transitional 545 433 21 71 0 2010-10-22 10:29
6 WashingtonPost.com @washingtonpost XHTML 1.0 Transitional 613 429 178 19 7 2010-10-23 05:58
7 Philly.com XHTML 1.0 Transitional 783 415 36 46 19 2010-10-22 10:22
8 OCRegister.com @OC_Register XHTML 1.0 Transitional 587 278 50 60 111 2010-10-22 10:20
9 LATimes.com @LATimes HTML 4.01 Transitional 832 259 306 40 14 2010-10-22 10:12
10 Reuters.com @reuters XHTML 1.0 Transitional 276 239 7 6 7 2010-10-22 10:27
Back to Previous

Top 10 Most Missing Alt Attribute Errors

№ Domain Twitter DOCTYPE ERR WAR CSS ALT ID Verified UVR H
1 Salon.com @SalonMedia XHTML 1.0 Transitional 363 91 79 94 8 2010-10-22 10:28
2 ScottMonty.com XHTML 1.0 Transitional 545 433 21 71 0 2010-10-22 10:29
3 WOMMA.org @WOMMA XHTML 1.0 Transitional 121 8 37 65 0 2010-10-23 06:01
4 BattelleMedia.com @johnbattelle XHTML 1.0 Transitional 209 63 5 64 0 2010-10-20 10:49
5 Xemion.com @jamespaden XHTML 1.0 Strict 107 35 7 64 0 2010-10-23 06:01
6 Valleywag.com @valleywag XHTML 1.0 Transitional 166 99 0 62 0 2010-10-23 05:54
7 USATODAY.com @USATODAY XHTML 1.0 Transitional 76 0 99 61 0 2010-10-23 05:53
8 Techipedia.com @tamar XHTML 1.0 Strict 192 77 38 61 6 2010-10-23 05:50
9 OCRegister.com @OC_Register XHTML 1.0 Transitional 587 278 50 60 111 2010-10-22 10:20
10 WebInkNow.com XHTML 1.0 Transitional 512 544 26 54 0 2010-10-23 05:59

Note: ALL SEOs managing a website marketing campaign with missing alt attributes should be questioned as to why they are missing. There is no valid excuse in this instance so the question is moot. ALL images MUST have an alt attribute assigned to them. If the image is being used as a decorative element, you MUST assign an empty alt="" attribute. The SEO Sniff Test

W3C: The attribute given above is required for an element that you've used, but you have omitted it. For instance, in most HTML and XHTML document types the "type" attribute is required on the "script" element and the "alt" attribute is required for the "img" element.
http://Validator.W3.org/docs/errors.html#ve-127

Back to Previous

Top 10 Most ID Already Defined Errors

№ Domain Twitter DOCTYPE ERR WAR CSS ALT ID Verified UVR H
1 OCRegister.com @OC_Register XHTML 1.0 Transitional 587 278 50 60 111 2010-10-22 10:20
2 Ask.com/News HTML 4.0 Strict 368 61 219 12 109 2010-10-20 10:40
3 Canada.com XHTML 1.0 Transitional 371 104 37 14 86 2010-10-20 11:09
4 ReadWriteWeb.com @RWW XHTML 1.0 Strict 210 98 9 11 68 2010-10-22 10:26
5 HolisticSearch.co.uk @peteyoung XHTML 1.0 Transitional 76 3 18 7 46 2010-10-20 11:45
6 HighRankings.com @jillwhalen XHTML 1.0 Transitional 137 46 1 6 43 2010-10-20 11:45
7 SearchEngineLand.com @sengineland XHTML 1.0 Transitional 134 66 19 32 39 2010-10-22 10:29
8 BitRebels.com @bitrebels XHTML 1.0 Transitional 299 169 16 28 39 2010-10-20 10:51
9 TopRankBlog.com @toprank XHTML 1.0 Transitional 113 9 16 1 33 2010-10-23 05:52
10 Vancouver2010.com XHTML 1.0 Strict 374 35 25 41 26 2010-10-23 05:54

Note: If you have IDs that are the same, which you cannot, there MAY be some serious challenges with your document. If it's an application relying on those IDs to perform certain functions, usually the first instance works, the others may or may not work depending on the implementation. The purpose of the ID is to be a unique identifier and serve just one instance of an element or function.

W3C: An "id" is a unique identifier. Each time this attribute is used in a document it must have a different value. If you are using this attribute as a hook for style sheets it may be more appropriate to use classes (which group elements) than id (which are used to identify exactly one element).
http://Validator.W3.org/docs/errors.html#ve-141

Here's a working example of how multiple IDs can disrupt document functionality...

If the above two Radio Buttons had the same ID assigned to them (id="Radio1") they would not function. In this example, the first Radio Button 1 (id="Radio1") would be permanently selected and the user could not select Radio Button 2 (id="Radio2") . This is just a very basic example of how having IDs that are not unique can break your documents. More Information on the LABEL Element

Back to Previous

We'll be providing more comprehensive website document validation statistics as data is reviewed and approved for public consumption.

 

SEO Consultants Directory