W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > September 2003

Re: Help Wanted: New Name/Interface for "Fussy" Parse Mode

From: Lloyd Wood <l.wood@eim.surrey.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2003 15:00:52 +0100 (BST)
To: Leo Breebaart <leo@lspace.org>
Cc: www-validator@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.50.0309011447060.9721-100000@argos.ee.surrey.ac.uk>

On Mon, 1 Sep 2003, Leo Breebaart wrote:

> Terje Bless <link@pobox.com> writes:
>
> > The concept it should get across, in two or preferably a single word,
> > is that of applying stricter, perhaps excessively so, rules; that does
> > use still the process of validation, but without implying anything
> > about the formal validity or lack of it in the results.
>
> Perhaps it could be called "pedantic" checking? This not only has a
> precedent of sorts in the GCC/G++ compiler flag of the same name, but is
> also, I think, by itself a good layman's one-word encapsulation of the
> concept as you describe it above: "applying stricter, perhaps
> excessively so, rules".

That's good and accurate, but I wouldn't expect the validator-using
web-design audience in general to be familiar with gcc compiler flags.

They're more likely to be familiar with perl, which does have a
'strict' pragma and a 'warn-all' flag, where a better analogy may be
made. (If we're going for multiple configurable levels of fussiness,
I'd suggest some sort of scale:
- pedantic
- rigorous
- strict
- tolerant
- lax
- like, whatever, dude. Why are you using this validator?)

L.

<http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/L.Wood/><L.Wood@ee.surrey.ac.uk>
Received on Monday, 1 September 2003 10:01:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 25 April 2012 12:14:09 GMT