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: <199909230017.CAA09698@vals.intramed.rito.no>
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 1999 02:07:12 +0200
From: Terje Bless <link@tss.no>
To: W3C Validator <www-validator@w3.org>
Subject: Re: OK to display W3C logo based on 3'rd party validator?

On 22.09.99 at 19:26, B. Szyszka <bart@gigabee.com> wrote:

>>And since Liam is too modest to say it himself: the WDG Validator _is_
>>better then the W3C one! Fairly significantly too.
>
>Hmm... WDG's validator doesn't seem to have support for XHTML:

Well "better" is both a relative term and a subjective one. :-)

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

                                             -link