W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > April 2004

Re: checklink: htmlhelp is forbidden

From: David Dorward <david@dorward.me.uk>
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2004 09:29:50 +0100
Message-Id: <67FF5856-86DB-11D8-B6AF-000A957E4F00@dorward.me.uk>
To: www-validator list <www-validator@w3.org>

On 5 Apr 2004, at 09:04, MichaelJennings wrote:
> W3C-checklink said to me, "You are no good - better fix it."
> David Dorward said to me, "You are wrong - w3c-checklink is right."

Hey! Don't (mis)quote me out of context please!

You said: "Actually, I think if you try the URL you'll find it is not 
only permitted..."
I said: "Certainly seems to be forbidden to me."

I do agree[1] that the explanation the link checker gives for a 
"Forbidden" response needs to be improved.

Currently it reads: "The link is forbidden! This needs fixing. Usual 
suspects: a missing index.html or Overview.html, or a missing ACL."

A better alternative might be: "This link is forbidden! This needs 
further investigation. It is possible that some or all robots (the Link 
Checker is a robot) are banned, you should check the page manually with 
a web browser. Other possible suspects include a missing index.html or 
misconfigured permission settings."

> Why should people complain when they're bound to be called fools?

I think you are reading too much into my message.

[1] I'm not sure who I'm agreeing with, I think someone responded off 
list, but I don't have my main email archive with me at present.

--
David Dorward
      <http://dorward.me.uk/>
<http://blog.dorward.me.uk/>
Received on Monday, 5 April 2004 04:29:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 25 April 2012 12:14:13 GMT