I just validated my log with the web2.0 validator;

The score for http://log.mroumen.com is 12 out of 51

The result;

• 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.