I just validated my log with the web2.0 validator;
The score for http://log.mroumen.com is 12 out of 51
- Uses inline AJAX ? No
- Uses python? No
- Is in public beta? Yes!
- Is Shadows-aware ? No
- Uses the prefix “meta” or “micro”? No
- Uses tags ? Yes!
- Has a Blogline blogroll ? No
- Uses Google Maps API? No
- Has favicon ? No
- Appears to be web 3.0 ? Yes!
- Appears to be non-empty ? No
- Uses Cascading Style Sheets? Yes!
- Mentions Less is More ? No
- Refers to mash-ups ? No
- Mentions startup ? No
- Attempts to be XHTML Strict ? No
- Refers to the Web 2.0 Validator’s ruleset ? No
- Mentions an “architecture of participation”? No
- Mentions Dave Legg ? No
- Appears to use AJAX ? No
- Appears to be built using Ruby on Rails ? No
- Makes reference to Technorati ? No
- Refers to Flickr ? Yes!
- Refers to VCs ? No
- Has that goofy ‘My Blog is Worth’ link ? No
- Links Slashdot and Digg ? No
- Mentions Nitro ? No
- Mentions The Long Tail ? Yes!
- Mentions Cool Words ? No
- Possibly contains bytes ? Yes!
- Mentions Ruby? Yes!
- Has prototype.js ? No
- Appears to use MonoRail ? Yes!
- Creative Commons license ? No
- Refers to podcasting ? No
- Mentions Ruby ? Yes!
- Mentions RDF and the Semantic Web? No
- Uses Semantic Markup? Yes!
- Use Catalyst ? No
- Refers to del.icio.us ? No
- Actually mentions Web 2.0 ? Yes!
- Refers to web2.0validator ? No
- Refers to Rocketboom ? No
- Uses microformats ? No
- Validates as XHTML 1.1 ? No
- Appears to over-punctuate ? No
- References Firefox? No
- References isometric.sixsided.org? No
- Mentions 30 Second Rule and Web 2.0 ? No
- Appears to have Adsense ? No
- Uses the “blink” tag? No
So I’ve got a lot to improve if I want my log to be really web2.0 :)
Link found on Geoffries log.
Update: whoops, november 83th isn’t a existing date :+
Changed to 18th.