Forum Moderators: open
For example, some errors can cause spiders to skip chunks of your text.
Different spiders will trip up on different errors.
As will different releases of the same spider.
Why risk deliberately inserting HTML coding errors into a page unless you have a very comprehensive and up to date model of the effects of those errors?
Especially as it takes longer to insert the bugs into the HTML than it does to write it without them.
If your pages are in then maybe validation will have little effect.
tedster has reported here a couple of times a class of validation error that prevented his pages being indexed at all.
Inserting those bugs would be a very big no-no.
Also, having related bugs that seem to work today, but which trip up the next release of Googlebot would be a downright shame.
We simply don't know what factors Google will use to differentiate sites for ranking purposes in the future -- whether factors chosen deliberately or as a result of coding errors. So inserting random bugs is like playing russian roulette
If someone choses to insert bugs in HTML, I don't have a problem with that. But I would if I were an investor in their enterprise and they didn't give me utterly convincing reasons for each and every proposed bug. Just saying "most sites don't bother" wouldn't be enough for me.
