W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator-css@w3.org > January 2005

Re: validator - how true is it?

From: olivier Thereaux <ot@w3.org>
Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 12:49:54 +0900
Message-Id: <84311846-66A8-11D9-AE52-000A95E54002@w3.org>
Cc: <www-validator-css@w3.org>
To: <ceo@alierra.com>
Hello Mark,

On Jan 14, 2005, at 23:56, <ceo@alierra.com> wrote:
> Validator has a very good concept behind it.  But the way it is 
> programmed right now creates chaos on inexperienced web users. For 
> some unknown reason many lay users consider Validator to be their GOD 
> and they believe that the results are 100% true.

For some people indeed, this is true. For a lot of technologies, the 
validator can sometimes be the only "face" users ever see, and they do 
not know that there are actually normative specifications behind, that 
the validator merely tries to follow as well as possible.

> Frankly speaking, before the Validator release its developers should 
> have explained that their program is being developed and the reports 
> may not be considered as a practical guide to action.

What makes you think this is not the case?

The validator has a public database of bugs, its homepage mentions 
constant bug-fixes in every release, validation results note that some 
technologies' support is incomplete, the FAQ[1] suggests that 
validation results should be taken with a grain of salt, etc.

[1] http://validator.w3.org/docs/help.html#validandquality

People sometimes make self-righteous comments without double-checking 
all their facts. I think your message just proved that this can happen 
to anyone, even with the best intentions :)...

How would you suggest we could improve our message that "validation is 
good, but it is neither flawless nor an ultimate goal"?

Thank you.

Received on Saturday, 15 January 2005 03:50:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:40:40 UTC