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

Re: CSS Validator complains about background-color -- but it's set!

From: pete scott <pete@teknine.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 08:47:12 -0500
Message-ID: <437C89E0.20900@teknine.com>
To: www-validator-css@w3.org

> On 11/6/05, Jukka K. Korpela <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> wrote:
>> On Sun, 6 Nov 2005, Cyber Dog wrote:
>>
>> > The short answer is, even though 'transparent' is valid css, the
>> > validator has been made to complain about it because a couple people
>> > feel its bad style to use it rather than a set color.
>>

The validator isn't _complaining_. It's warning you. There is a HUGE 
difference.

If, for example, you get on your bicycle and pedal out to the street and 
I say to you "Hey, your brakes look like they might be a little loose. 
Be careful!", that is a warning.

If I say "You put that bike together backwards. And the chain is 
missing", THEN I am complaining about validation.

Anyways, correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't the validator say 
"Congratulations! This document validates as CSS!" right there above all 
the warnings?

A more accurate statement might be:
"'background-color:transparent' is (at the moment) perfectly valid CSS 
and you should feel free to use it despite the warnings, which serve to 
make CSS beginners (who are most likely religiously using the validator) 
aware of the inherit dangers of specifying a color for a potentially 
unknown background color."

I think a more notable solution than creating two kinds of warnings in 
the validator or what-have-you would be to DEVELOP A BETTER WARNING 
MESSAGE FOR THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION.

fwiw

--
FN:pete scott
EMAIL;TYPE=internet,pref:pete@teknine.com
TZ:-05:00
Received on Thursday, 17 November 2005 14:30:55 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 27 June 2012 00:14:16 GMT