W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > November 2002

Re: checklink: very nice

From: Terje Bless <link@pobox.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2002 18:50:08 +0100
To: W3C Validator <www-validator@w3.org>
cc: Tex Texin <tex@XenCraft.com>
Message-ID: <A01060006-1022-2BEC3EACFFD511D6ACB000039300CF5C@[193.157.66.10]>

Tex Texin <tex@i18nguy.com> wrote:

>Also the todo list http://validator.w3.org/todo.html entertains link
>checking, "fixing" html and perhaps other items suggesting more than
>pure validation.

Yes, these are items on the TODO list. They're there because these would be
usefull and valuable features to have. But they are _still_ on the TODO
list -- as opposed to having been implemented -- because they are
orthogonal to the main purpose of the Validator.


>And, there are other products that do lint checking
>that are calling themselves validators...

Yes, this is one of our major problems. Very few of the "lints" out there
actually acknowledge that they are in fact "linters" and not -- as the
Validator aspires to be -- a formal validator. This distinction has
typically been hard to communicate, and is not helped by the other common
misconception that either tool is sufficient by itself.


>In any event, I claim there is a popular (mis)conception about the
>purpose of the W3C validator and a sentence or two would clarify that.

I agree. Unfortunately I don't think "a sentence or two" is sufficient for
this purpose.


-- 
Interviewer: "In what language do you write your algorithms?"
    Abigail: English.
Interviewer: "What would you do if, say, Telnet didn't work?"
    Abigail: Look at the error message.
Received on Sunday, 24 November 2002 12:50:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 25 April 2012 12:14:04 GMT