Tuning in to W3C
Greg Harvey explains why the W3C guidelines should be of interest to every employer with a website...
The growth of the web
In its infancy the World Wide Web was a simple place. Created by scientists at the famous CERN laboratory , it was made up of simple text and table-based information with its only purpose being to share scientific information over a small network of computers. As time passed that network grew to include more institutions and more individuals. As it grew, its true potential began to be realised and its use began to change, albeit slowly at first. The real beginning of the web we see now was probably the concept of people having personal 'home pages'. These early few started messing around with things like ASCII art (making pictures by using monospaced fonts ) and doing crazy things like adding colour (heaven forbid) or centring text. As the World Wide Web spread globally, the corporate world began to take an interest and strange things started to happen. People wanted to design web pages for the first time.
The trouble was that the browsers of the time didn't really allow for design. There was no technology for introducing graphics into web pages. Highly compressed image formats like the JPEG or the GIF weren't even in existence and modems were slow. Browsers served information and that was that. However, there was one revolutionary new piece of software that was going to change all that forever. Born out of a student project in 1993, Mosaic was the first ever graphics-enabled Internet browser. Its success was phenomenal and it soon became the backbone of a company that many of you will know in name at least, Netscape . Early versions of Netscape were basic and they weren't free either. However, what they did for the first time was allow people to control the look of their pages: to design .
Netscape's success didn't go unnoticed. By the time they were on to version 3 of their fantastical software, Microsoft had woken up and were busily producing a rival, their now famous Internet Explorer (a pub name of the future, perhaps?) The new element of competition caused these companies to strive to out-do each other. They were desperate to get the edge and make their browsers serve more media-rich content, allow more freedom of design and attract more interest from an emerging profession: web designers.
All manner of new methods and means began to spring up for displaying pages. It was already the case that these rival software companies were pulling in different directions, with their own ideas on the best way to deal with issues such as embedding video and multimedia content and the concept of ' layering ' (first dreamt up by Netscape). And worse still, some communities of developers, deeply unhappy with both Netscape and Microsoft, were creating browsers of their own, freely available and rapidly becoming popular choices for those in the know. With all of these different groups getting involved in the future of browser technology and the workings of the Internet, somebody needed to bring order to this emerging chaos.
Setting the standard
Enter the W3C , or the World Wide Web Consortium , to give it its full title. It's a collaboration of top experts from a number of communities whose sole task is to advise on the future technical development of the Internet. Since its birth, the reputation and weight it carries within the industry has steadily grown to the point where these days its recommendations are considered to be international standards upon publication. It is fair to say that in the present climate the W3C's papers are the absolute equivalent to the ISO standards .
So who answers to them? It's an interesting arrangement really, as the W3C themselves have no real power and as such, no one answers to them. Their standards are adopted due to the way they choose to operate rather than through any kind of legislative approach: the W3C 'process', as they call it. By way of an example, let's take the creation and implementation of HTML 4.0 in 1997.
The W3C actually create Working Groups whenever they embark on a project of this nature. The job of the Working Group is to look at what already exists on the market and decide what's worth keeping, what isn't and what's missing from the language of focus for that group, HTML 4.0 in this case. This frequently takes years to complete as the task is mammoth and the debates are long, but ultimately the Working Group comes out the other side of the process with a specifications document for HTML 4.0. Which is all very interesting, but the key is this:
The W3C realise that they can't enforce their recommendations, so instead they build the key industry players in to the Working Groups. Using our example, HTML 4.0's Working Group included key figures from Adobe Systems , Hewlett Packard , IBM , Microsoft , Netscape Communications , Novell and Sun Microsystems to name but a few, all of whom are enormous companies in the IT and Internet world. By involving these people in the process of creating the recommendations, they ensure that these companies adopt the recommendations, and if companies with this kind of size and reputation are doing it, everyone else soon falls in to line.
And what's the business case for these companies that are seemingly selflessly giving their vast resources to such a venture? Quite simply, standards help everybody. By joining the W3C process these organisations pool their resources to pay together for what would normally cost them millions and millions of dollars individually, every time they had to release a new piece of Internet software . This way they no longer have to worry about what their browser has to do . The W3C has decided that for them. All they have to do now is make sure their browser does it better than anyone else's, safe in the knowledge that everyone in the race is reading from the same rulebook.
How the W3C affects you
So we've established why the W3C exists and how it goes about its work, but you are probably still wondering how it affects your business. The reasons for taking very careful notice of the W3C (and making sure your suppliers do as well) are many and varied. Let's look at some of the key reasons the standards should matter to you.
Quality assurance
The Internet has without doubt entered a new phase in its development. The W3C standards draw a line in the sand for web developers. For the time being Microsoft's browser, Internet Explorer - the market leader by a country mile, still has a 'quirks mode'. The purpose of this mode is to work outside the standards and compensate for bad programming by second-guessing errors and filling in gaps in code. Without it many websites would fail to display correctly, if at all.
However the question has to be, how much longer will this 'quirks mode' still exist? Think for a moment of the costs involved for Microsoft and their rivals in having to develop two browsers in one every time they create a new version of Internet Explorer. The world's leading open source browser, Mozilla , always has been standards only. It simply will not support non-standard code. As developers increasingly adopt the W3C and the industry moves towards standardisation, surely it is only a matter of time before Microsoft and companies like them decide to drop their expensive compensations for poor practice.
If the W3C standards are taken forward further by these companies, then where does that leave developers who've had their heads in the sand? It will clearly mean a lot of wasted time and money bringing the large number of offending websites up to scratch. I know myself, being currently in the process of phasing out my own non-standards compliant websites, that this is a painstaking and time consuming job. It is certainly better done now than when it's too late. For all we know the adoption of 'quirks' may even stop in the next browser release.
So think of the W3C validation as a mark of quality. It's as close as you can get to a guarantee against further expensive works in the future. Without it, can you really be sure your website will continue to perform effectively in an ever changing technical environment? I would suggest not.
Accessibility
The whole issue of accessibility is something of a hot topic at the moment. Furthermore, it is particularly relevant to the recruitment industry. Your recruitment process has to be open to all, within reason, by law. Increasingly, so does your website. Especially if it's an integral part of your recruitment process. The RNIB are currently funding several lawsuits against large companies under the Disability Discrimination Act for failing to make their websites accessible. No one wants this to be them. Not only is it extremely costly, but also extremely embarrassing. It could destroy a carefully created employer brand in one fell swoop.
So here's a nice little kickback for adhering to the W3C standards. If you do then you automatically create a website that is completely accessible. Part of the W3C's mandate and mission is to make an accessible World Wide Web and so their standards, by definition, meet your accessibility requirements. Get that W3C 'tick' and you don't have to worry about accessibility. It's all taken care of.
Corporate responsibility
As a small side point, but in my opinion no less an important one, whether legal or otherwise, any company with a strong sense of corporate responsibility cannot afford to ignore the W3C standards when creating their next website. If you embrace them and carry them forward then you are in effect actively involving yourself in the whole Internet standardisation process, championing accessibility and showing your competitors the way forward - a considerable boost for your credibility, I'm sure you'll agree. And you can deservedly give yourselves a good pat on the back.
Search engine optimisation
Another nice kickback from the W3C and accessibility awareness is search engine 'friendliness', for want of a better word. It isn't just the browser manufacturers who are embracing the standards. It just so happens that all of the major search engines these days are geared towards reading information from your website in a standards-based manner as well. They simply follow, understand and feed back accessible W3C validated code in a more efficient way. W3C standards are not some kind of search engine magic bullet that will solve all your problems, but what they are is a step in the right direction. It's about making sure your content is as easy to access as possible to start with as a good foundation to build on.
By way of an example, take a look at my own site, www.su-22.com (a diary and information about my musical activities). Type 'London band' in to Google and you will see it is result number eleven (at time of writing this article), which is pretty high up. I have done nothing special with my website whatsoever. I haven't attempted to optimise it, nor have I done anything clever or fancy. It is just accessible and standards-compliant and Google likes that sort of thing.
So is it difficult?
Now at this point you're probably wondering what you have to do to get a standards-compliant website. You're probably also wondering why everyone isn't doing it if it's so great. What's the catch? How much extra will it cost me?
Well, the W3C are a not-for-profit organisation so validation is free for a start. And as for development time, there is no difference. The fundamental difference is working methods. Because the Internet used to be so ad hoc and the browsers had no set standards, developers got used to being happy just to get something to work. Bodge jobs were often the only way to get websites running on multiple platforms or in various different browsers. There were no standards that you could sensibly and reliably adhere to, so the whole medium was a free for all.
These days the standards are out there, they need to be employed, employing them is not difficult and it needn't be expensive. It really is a simple case of old dogs needing to learn new tricks. Teaching them can be tricky, but it is happening. Through my work at SitePoint and as an active member of the developer community, I see that people entering the Internet industry fresh are very switched on to the new challenges. I'm also aware that many of us who have been in the business for some years are also keenly embracing what can only be a good thing.
And so the simple message is that the W3C standards are easy to implement, inexpensive and good for your online business. So if you don't think you're W3C compliant yet then it's time to make sure you are.
Greg Harvey is a member of the web consulting team at work. 
