[uf-discuss] stats on well formed XHTML
Derrick Lyndon Pallas
derrick at pallas.us
Thu Jan 17 08:23:50 PST 2008
Karl Dubost wrote:
> to really evaluate this, there are two parameters to take into account.
> nb of xhtml pages
> ----------------- [now]
> nb of total pages
I can probably tell you both of those numbers for the last couple of
months. Knowing how many pages are malformed might take a bit longer.
> but in my humble opinion, more interesting would be to have this ratio
> for each year with *only the new pages* created during the year.
> Unfortunately because there is no uniform way to sign the date of
> pages, and because HTTP is even a worse shape than HTML, it is almost
> impossible to evaluate.
Not so. The Internet Archive knows the first time they've seen an URL,
over the past ten years; they can also tell you when the content has
significantly changed. Obviously, there is a bias towards pages (and
sites) with higher traffic, but that seems reasonable if you're
evaluating standard practices. ~ Derrick Pallas
More information about the microformats-discuss