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

Re: Color in pages

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 02:51:28 +0000 (UTC)
To: Jon Ribbens <jon+www-validator@unequivocal.co.uk>
Cc: www-validator@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0411220250230.12149@dhalsim.dreamhost.com>

On Mon, 22 Nov 2004, Jon Ribbens wrote:
>
> I must admit I don't entirely get this. Why does the word "valid" have 
> such a strange meaning when applied to HTML? In any normal situation, 
> data which did not conform to the text of a specification would be 
> considered "invalid". For some reason, with HTML data can be wrong but 
> "valid". Surely in such an example as above it should be described as 
> "valid SGML" but "invalid HTML"? If not, why not?

Historical reasons. To satisfy the "validity" pedants, I'd recommend using 
the word "conformant" instead. So a document can be "valid" but 
non-conformant at the same time, because validity is a (pretty arbitrary) 
subset of conformance.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Monday, 22 November 2004 02:51:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 25 April 2012 12:14:15 GMT