Re: OK to display W3C logo based on 3'rd party validator?

From: Terje Bless (link@tss.no)
Date: Wed, Sep 22 1999


Message-Id: <199909221542.RAA03139@vals.intramed.rito.no>
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 1999 17:47:24 +0200
From: Terje Bless <link@tss.no>
To: Liam Quinn <liam@htmlhelp.com>
cc: Ann Navarro <ann@webgeek.com>, Uriel Wittenberg <uw@urielw.com>, www-validator@w3.org
Subject: Re: OK to display W3C logo based on 3'rd party validator?

On 22.09.99 at 10:27, Liam Quinn <liam@htmlhelp.com> wrote:

>Ann Navarro wrote:
> 
>>they don't use the W3C Validator source
>
>note that both validators use the same SGML parser. Everything else about
>the validators is mostly just dressing up what the SGML parser spits out.

Exactly! If you pass one you should pass the other. Anything else is a bug!


>>it wouldn't be wise to do so. Their programming techniques may very well
>>be up to par with the W3C version, but then again, they might overlook
>>something, or not be as fine tuned as the W3C version
>
>Or it might be better than the W3C version.

And since Liam is too modest to say it himself: the WDG Validator _is_
better then the W3C one! Fairly significantly too.

-- 
*** I just switched to a new email client.
*** If you see any format problems in this message, yell. Loudly! :-)

                                             -link