W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator-css@w3.org > October 2011

Re -Re CSS Validator Bug - A big one

From: Brian <brians.emailz@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 12:38:39 -0500
Message-ID: <CAHWV3uw0A=Dc=O7-kmGohqQdZC78yM2Cq1WdG18oReGB50J+YQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: www-validator-css@w3.org
I wasn't really looking to argue semantics or to have my needs
prioritized based on your interests or values.  This is a problem
worth looking into for future updates and my post was to the W3
organization, so they will "hopefully" consider it in future updates.
It was not intended, so I can hear someone's breakdown of how they
"think" this all works or who this should all be for.

> I'm afraid the internal structure of the W3C CSS Validator makes it hard to build more logic into it, even if the logic itself would be simple. (Just a half-educated guess; I > don't know the structure.)
> This is not a big issue though

W3 has worked hard to establish themselves with an image as an
international source with a selfless mission to improve the internet.
Well, they succeeded... and you may be surprised, or rather would be,
to find out that businesses, clients, and simply interested parties
use the W3 validators to verify the past work of potential new
contracts.  Stating that no style sheet, an empty style sheet, or
empty tags is as valid as a properly formatted and fully CSS compliant
website, causes a problem for skilled developers and gives a leg up on
the ones, who have no right to be offering services they can't
honestly provide.  Yet again, my post was a request to have this
looked into during a future update, not to hear your analysis.
Received on Friday, 28 October 2011 17:41:55 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 27 June 2012 00:14:29 GMT