W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-evangelist@w3.org > September 2002

Re: Validation was Re: Non-conformance by W3C members

From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2002 13:19:34 -0400
Message-Id: <a05111b08b9a286bcc107@[10.0.1.2]>
To: public-evangelist@w3.org

At 05:20 -0700 2002-09-09, Matthias Gutfeldt wrote:
>Validation is simply a check against the referenced DTD, nothing
>else. So any HTML document that conforms to the referenced DTD is
>valid. Whether the document uses the right markup for the right
>content, or whether the text makes any sense at all, is not part of
>the validation process. That's why even valid HTML, just like
>spell-checked documents, can be complete gibberish. See
><http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=35080%40sdcc12.ucsd.edu&output=gplain>.

There's more than that, there are requirements in the W3C 
specifications which can not be defined with a DTD. So can make a 
three level rocket ;)

1. Validity with regards to the DTD
	Automatic process if the validator checks everything and does 
not contains errors.

2. Conformance with regards to the specifications.
	For example, the stylesheet language when you are not using a 
style element or/and an external style sheet.
	See http://www.la-grange.net/2002/04/03-styleatt-wo-meta.html

3. Respect of the semantic as you said in your mail.


On top of that we can add the respect of the semantics. :)

I think the respect of the Semantic will be the most difficult to 
achieve even if it's the easiest to achieve and understand.


-- 
Karl Dubost / W3C - Conformance Manager
           http://www.w3.org/QA/

      --- Be Strict To Be Cool! ---
Received on Monday, 9 September 2002 13:14:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 15 July 2011 00:13:21 GMT