W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator-css@w3.org > November 2004

Re: Bug report

From: Olivier Thereaux <ot@w3.org>
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 21:59:58 +0900
To: Mats Hindhede <mats.hindhede@comhem.se>
Cc: www-validator-css@w3.org
Message-ID: <20041114125958.GA15135@w3.mag.keio.ac.jp>

On Sun, Nov 14, 2004, Mats Hindhede wrote: 
> The problem ("Generic-font-family warning despite generic family") described
> in bug 818 in your "Bugzilla" at
> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/buglist.cgi?product=CSSValidator
> has NOT been resolved by Olivier Thereaux, despite his claims to the
> contrary.

The bug was closed, - not by me, by the way, but by Etan if I remember
correctly - because, the original bug report and test case was
erroneous. My name is there as "default owner" for this bugzilla
product.

> It is still possible to get very irritating false
> warnings of this nature, as this example shows:
> http://www.proffs.nu/styles/ourstyle.css

If you think the bug should be reopened and a good test case for the
bug, why don't you just reopen it? Our system allows you to do so, and
that would be more helpful, I think, than sending a misinformed - not to
mention a little rude - message to this mailing-list.

> If you can't resolve such a simple matter, what's the use of having a CSS
> validator at all?
> 
> Wouldn't it be right to assume that such a buggy CSS validator as yours does
> a lot more harm than good to web standards?

The CSS validator is provided as a free service, hosted freely by W3C,
and maintained as an open-source project mainly by volunteers of this
community. It is not bug free, nor claims to be.

Your concerns are duly appreciated, and you have the right to express
you opinion (if done in a constructive manner) but I honestly have to
remind, once again, that participation is a better way to fix bugs than
criticism.

Regards,
-- 
olivier
Received on Sunday, 14 November 2004 13:00:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 27 June 2012 00:14:15 GMT