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

Re: validator - how true is it?

From: <ceo@alierra.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 15:40:39 +0200
Message-ID: <008101c5053e$f6b75b50$8800a8c0@homesy7xh0tmi1>
To: <www-validator-css@w3.org>
Hello guys! Sorry I was away and could not reply back in a timely manner.  I now see that Validator has a lot of supporters..:-) This is really good. But I still feel that Validator has way too many faults within its program.

  1.. On the very front page of your respected http://validator.w3.org you should mention that the program is not bug-free. Otherwise, the absence of this message makes people believe that validator is a reliable program.
  2.. Have http://www.msn.com, http://www.google.com, or http://www.ebay.com typed into the address area. How will you comment their error report? I will doubt that MSN, Google, or Ebay corporations hire the worst html-coders. 
  3.. I had my own site http://www.alierra.com "validatored". I particularly liked the following mistake:
Line 11, column 6: end tag for element "HEAD" which is not open

</HEAD>

However, line 2 has the following tag <HEAD>.   

How will you comment this? 

  4.. I believe every site, which is a more or less complicated, will have at least 30 mistakes within the Validator.
I was just merely saying that inexperienced users firmly believe in Validator and they require their sites to be in conformity with its rules. Whereas, the users do not understand that the rules are not perfect. 

 

 

Mark Sonrello  

Alierra Design Company 

http://www.alierra.com  

email: ceo@alierra.com 

 
Received on Friday, 28 January 2005 13:40:57 GMT

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