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

Re: Can we have the "type" and "encoding" options back?

From: Terje Bless <link@pobox.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2002 23:47:56 +0100
To: W3C Validator <www-validator@w3.org>
cc: Ulrich Mueller <ulm@kph.uni-mainz.de>
Message-ID: <a01060007-1022-1B1BCCDA019111D7B52A00039300CF5C@[193.157.66.10]>

Ulrich Mueller <ulm@kph.uni-mainz.de> wrote:

>- The selections for "type" and "encoding" are no longer present on
>the result page, so there seems to be no easy way to revalidate the
>document, e.g. with a different doctype.

These options will only appear on pages that are not Valid in the current
version. The intended function of these options is to help you make your
documents Valid, and the assumption then went that once the page is Valid
you no longer have a need of them. Removing them on Valid results pages
were a tradeoff between offering functionality and making the results easy
to interpret.

We are considering providing the functionality you are asking for in a
future version of the Validator.


>- Is it really necessary to use the &ldquo; and &rdquo; entities? Some
>old browsers are not happy with them. Wouldn't simple double quotes do?

Well, not really "necessary" per se, but we thought they were nice. :-)

More seriously; what specific browsers have trouble with them and how does
this "trouble" manifest itself?


-- 
Editor's note: in the last update,   we noted that Larry Wall would "vomment"
on existing RFCs. Some took that to be a cross between "vomit" and "comment."
We are unsure of whether it was a subconscious slip or a typographical error.
We are also unsure of whether or not to regret the error.      -- use.perl.org
Received on Tuesday, 26 November 2002 17:48:00 GMT

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