W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > June 2000

Re: XHTML validation

From: <JAMESICUS@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 07:02:37 EDT
Message-ID: <d3.5a36944.26776ecd@aol.com>
To: www-validator@w3.org, bertilow@hem.passagen.se

Bertilo Wennergren wrote:

>  Actually there is _no working XHTML validator out there now_. All that
>  I have tried are seriously broken, and the one at W3C is by far 
>  the worst.

I have been following your message threads with fascination and great 
interest.  I ran your two test exemplars:

http://www.concinnity.se/bertilow/div/mad.html

http://www.concinnity.se/bertilow/div/testform.htm

through the W3C and  WDG  Validators and sure enough they passed muster with 
the usual "Congratulations ..." message.


A run through the  XHTML Validator 0.9  produced "element name mismatch" ... 
? for your file "mad.html" and "unconsumed element 'input' " ... ? for your 
file "check.html".

What really surprised me was that both of your files passed muster 
("Congratulations" , etc.) when I ran them in  XML.com's  RUWF (are you well 
formed) XML Syntax Checker:

http://www.xml.com/xml/pub/tools/ruwf/check.html

I have been checking all of my XHTML 1.0 (Transitional) pages using the W3C 
Validator in conjunction with the XML.com RUWF checker (as an additional 
verifier) and assumed I was producing fully valid XHTML pages. Your 
observations and queries, Bertilow, have really tweaked my curiosity and I 
will follow the (hopefully quick) resolution with greater interest yet.

James Pickering
Received on Tuesday, 13 June 2000 07:03:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 25 April 2012 12:13:54 GMT