W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org > November 1998

Re: Validators that don't validate (continued)

From: Leonard R. Kasday <kasday@acm.org>
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 14:36:26 -0500
Message-Id: <3.0.32.19981116112154.013a48a8@pop3.concentric.net>
To: nir@nirdagan.com (Nir Dagan), w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org
Yes, it's true that the validator shouldn't be criticized for being "overly
strict", but there's another point they also make, that the error messages
are cryptic:

When tag attributes aren't surrounded by quotes, W3C reports
"An attribute value must be a literal unless it contains only name
characters." Ampersands in URLs (technically a no-no, though
quite common) are met with cryptic "General entity not defined"
reports.

Len


At 11:25 AM 11/14/98 GMT, Nir Dagan wrote:
>I think we should very well explain to the public 
>why these guys are wrong:
>
>http://webbuilder.netscape.com/Authoring/HtmlValid/ss06.html
>
>To make a long story short, they claim that real validators are
>bad because they find errors that other "validators" let them get 
>away with. They say its bad because "both" Netscape and 
>explorer "support" these errors (invalid nestings, not escaped 
>ampresands in URLs, unquoted attributes etc.). 
>
>The bottom line is that they recommend using 
>mediocre checkers and not to use validators.
>
>Regards,
>
>Nir Dagan, Ph.D.
>http://www.nirdagan.com
>mailto:nir@nirdagan.com
>
>"There is nothing quite so practical as a good theory." 
>-- A. Einstein
>
>
>
-------
Leonard R. Kasday
Institute on Disabilities/UAP at Temple University, Philadelphia PA
email:     kasday@acm.org
telephone: (215} 204 2247
Received on Monday, 16 November 1998 14:36:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:01:27 UTC