W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2001

Re: HTML validator

From: David Woolley <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2001 19:54:42 +0000 (GMT)
Message-Id: <200102041954.f14JsgL28964@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
> 
> But not everyone can do this.  Seems like it basically comes down to a
> usability and talent issue if we want the whole world to use this tool.

As far as I know, the validator will always accept valid HTML, except
for HTML 2.0 and earlier that has a missing DOCTYPE, which it will 
assume to be HTML 4.01.  There is very little HTML around that would
claim to be HTML 2.0.  (OK, my personal home page does, but it hasn't
been updated for a long time and it does have a DOCTYPE.)

HTML 3.2 is not a problem, because it is *NOT* valid without a DOCTYPE.

Unless the validator has changed again recently, it will not accept 
HTML 4.01 without warning about a missing DOCTYPE.

You seem to want to get the list of residual errors in invalid HTML,
based on particular versions, rather than to confirm complete
validity.  If you have a strict conformance requirement for anything
above HTML 2.0, the online validator should not give you false positives.

Generally the best that can be hoped for these days, in most cases,
is HTML 4.01 Transitional.

If you still want to force a DOCTYPE, you can always capture the page
source and use the upload a file option after pasting in the DOCTYPE
that you think it should have had.
Received on Sunday, 4 February 2001 14:55:00 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:13:53 GMT