W3C mobileOK Checker - is it too harsh?

[nubbin]

Hi,
I'm rewriting one of my sites to be responsive.
I've always aimed for zero errors in my sites in W3C HTML and CSS validation.
I just noticed the W3C mobileOK Checker.

Should I be aiming for a good score on this for a responsive ecommerce site? Or is it really meant for mobile only sites?

Some of the criteria seem old fashioned in this era of faster mobile connections and higher data allowances. E.g. a critical criteria is page should be less than 20kb.
If I was to make the page less than 20kb it would be totally boring, especially on a larger screen. I have to have images as it is an ecommerce site.

I checked a few sites including my own and some that are considered "state of the art" responsive (google "skinny ties") get very low scores.

So, is it worth trying to get a high score for a responsive site?
Do you often use the checker?
Thanks

[Hoople]

I have been looking for a better version of this test too. Too bad the forum charter precludes posting links to likely replacements. Feel free to 'sticky' me with good ones!

IMHO the 'W3C mobileOK Checker' seems like it was written in 2009 by someone who has a 10mb data plan! I used it to 'mobilize' one site in 2011 and it ended up looking way too close to a starting page from a template vendor! The W3C has become a slow moving behemoth, look how long CSS 2.x final took! I wouldn't hope for a 2013 compatible version prior to 2016!

[drhowarddrfine]

We find it very useful though a few of the warnings should be taken as advisement and not rules.

@Hoople, nothing in that should cause a change in the look of a site. Look elsewhere for that problem.