Benefits of W3C Compliance

I could very well have found my first customer in need of web design assistance (woo hoo). They currently have a simple website, which suits there needs. I have no intention of making it more complex.

However, they are using a full table layout, with lots and lots of javascript rollovers etc.

I would basically like to assist them in bringing there website into a more webstandards compliant position.

Since its more of a hobby to me, I am likley to do it for next to nothing (just a couple of pints tbh), but ..... I am still a perfectionist, and do not want to go giving him false information simply so that i pick this business up.

So, can anyone point me to, or tell me about any specific, measurable benefits from moving to a CSS based layout as opposed to the orrible looking tables he's using at the moment.

Whilst i will probably do this work for him for next to nothing, there is a significant potential to cross sell other services, just in case you were wondering why this is so important to me.

Any help appreciated guys.

CSS > Tables
Pages are smaller and load faster.
Browsers cache the CSS file meaning that it only needs to reload the small html page.
Easier to build whole sites using 1 external style sheet
Makes code clean and easy to change manipulate

Complience > Non Complience
Your webpage will display properly in more browsers
Your webpage will stay pretty when browsers update the way they display code.
Support for tags may stop or change meaning when you make a site with non complient code the site you have made will not properly function.
You also get to put a nice little XHTML compliant sticker on yoru webpage

CSS rollovers are much simpler and load faster than javascript.

Tutorial = http://www.webdesignforums.net/showthread.php?t=22807

Have fun with your project

Thanks, i appreciate it.

I will just point out that allthough i appreciate the link to the tutorial, i have been writing CSS websites for some time now, and allthough i am learning all the time, as is everyone, I am competant.

I was more looking for some documentation on the actual measured benefits of a CSS layout vs a table layout.

Ie... Statistics.

I apoligise for not explaining myself correctly, I was in a hurry.

Firstly i wasn't suggesting you was incompetant, i just gave you the link because i was using javascript rollovers until i came across this and i think this is a much better way of approaching things. That and you said the site was doing had loads of javascript rollovers...

I assume by statistics you mean bandwidth, file size differences? Or do you mean development time? I have never come accross concreate statistics for any of the things i mentioned, this is because bandwidth and file sizes vary from page to page and developer to developer.

Logic dictates that if your file sizes are smaller and more easily cached then it will lead to improvements across the board.

Perhaps someone else will come forwards with some direct comparisons.

CSS hovers are awesome and work with javascript turned on or off. As stated earlier in this thread the advantages of seperating design from the content, using semantic markup and no tables is you get a lean mean easy to manage web site that can easily be modified in any way be it visual or structural. Just edit a single CSS file and you have a site wide change. Pretty cool stuff.

__________________

You see i know all of this............ I know it, and i practice it.

The problem is i need some fact and figures to prove what im saying to this particular client (goddamn customers lol).

So figures on improvment of bandwidth usage, load time, file size, even search engine placements of css based websites compared to table based websites would be of interest to me.

Just tell him it will save him money in the long run. Cuts down on maintenance times, increases page viewability thus potentially increasing revenue etc etc..

__________________

Tell them that Search Engines love less code and their possible higher placement in Search Engines. That should make their eyes sparkle!

All of this is basically a wash! You don't gain enough to matter. Is that a straight enough answer? 5k over 15k over 20k? You are talking milliseconds in a broadband world.

Dialup?.. who really cares? Not me! Dialup, on average, costs as much as basic broadband. There are places where you can't get major broadband, but usually can get ISDN which is pretty darn acceptable these days.

Wireless... still not a big deal between 5k vs 20k. It's seconds at the most. 8 seconds vs 12 seconds... it's irrelevant.

This really has nothing to do with CSS. Search engines can read everything in your tables just fine. Has more to do with a properly structured document which you can do even with tables. H1-H2's, P, Lists, ALT tags, etc.. etc..

CSS is not a magic pill that solves everything. It's a tool that needs to be used in combination with other tools. If used properly, you end up with a streamlined document that is more compatible to many internet devices and more accessible to the general public and handicapped people.

If your customer wants some "fuzzy warm feeling" reason for using CSS, just explain how if he had a disabled family member, wouldn't he want them to be able to enjoy the internet just like everyone else does? The more compliant a website is, the better chance any assistive device will be able to manipulate it however the person requires.

Just tell your client that this how you design pages. By designing pages this way you get the benefits above. if you stick with dodgy code and tables you will have the following disadvantages.

If they still want facts and figures dump them, you don't need facts and figures to see the benefits, it sounds to me that they are just time wasters.

As for what mreine said, it's generally true, but if you've got a high traffic site, saving 15kb on every page load will save lots of money.

(X)HTML compliance also ensures that the web page will be more likely to display properly in varying browsers. I've also heard (but cannot verify) that search engines will stop crawling a site if it encounters too many errors. Regardless, it's always best to have a site that validates.