XHTML Coding Services
There have been a lot of XHTML/CSS services that have popped up recently. Seems like anyone with a text editor and a copy of Web Standards Solutions
The Good
A friend of mine recently used one of the more well known services for a project. It was a new project that had a design, but needed the XHML and CSS code. He let me take a look at the code to assess the quality of the code. The markup was pretty good, they did a real good job with semantics and the code was valid. I did think there was a small case of DIV-itis and the markup could have been trimmed a bit.
My friend said they were accommodating with change problems that came up in the code and the turn around was as advertised. These services are perfect for small agencies that don’t have designers that code themselves and do a lot of brochure-ware small business sites.
The Bad
The biggest problem with these services is knowing when to use them and getting maintainable CSS code. Most of the services are really only suited for new projects. It’s somewhat difficult to use these services with existing sites. Then I found the way they wrote their CSS hard to follow. There are many ways to write CSS and if the service doesn’t write in a similar style, it can be hard to build upon the existing style-sheet.
There were also minor problems with cross-browser consistency. It’s good that they are willing to make changes, but I can see it becoming a pain to go back and forth, especially if you are on a deadline of your own.
The Ugly
I’ve come to think of good XHTML & CSS as sort of an art form and this makes the skill a commodity. Wordpress.org says “Code is Poetry” and what these services do is make it more like gossip. I think it’s right for some situations but I think those situations are quite small. For anybody that’s worked on large, highly trafficked sites their services are just not an option.
Has anyone tried these services? What’s been your experience?
→ Ben @ November 1st, 2007 at 3:28 pm
I find that most browser inconsistencies can be ironed out if you reset the browser’s default styling in the first place. It’s best just to test in every browser you have access to. And this shouldn’t be a pain, you need to test in every browser. It’s part of the job.
These services are only of value if the XHTML+CSS generated is digestable by others - does it suffer from classitis? Did they have to use that complex selector when they could have used an element selector? Is the whitespace too generous? Did they comment the CSS enough? Did they use h1 for the main heading? Is the document still presentational?
Handwritten code is best, but obviously not everyone can do it. I think the best way is to see some actual examples of the service output - and if it’s good enough, you’ve found your guy.
→ Adam Craven @ December 17th, 2007 at 7:31 pm
I run one of the aforementioned services and we’re currently going through a transitional period - I want to clearly set our business above the rest, revamp the site and build on our excellent client list. The disheartening aspect is the comment; “we can get a coder for £10/hr, why would I want to use your service?”.
It’s frustrating, refusing to see the cost savings in the long run. Building maintainable CSS/HTML with modular based designs - rather than a page by page mentality - offering excellent browser support, great quality checks and fantastic after service…
I guess not everyone is as emotional about the web. I want products and services that ‘feel’ good.