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

Options and presentation of validator

From: Philip Chalmers <philipchalmers@blueyonder.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 15:17:38 -0000
To: <www-validator@w3.org>
Message-ID: <MDBBKOOCNOOHCNBOMDIHGEHBCKAA.philipchalmers@blueyonder.co.uk>


Some suggestions to maximise ease of use and provide a clear statement of
the options - to encourage more people to validate their mark-up, even those
who already think they are good at HTML / XHTML!

Some of my suggestions assume that the unpublished "direct input" option
(http://validator.w3.org/fragment-upload.html) will be released fairly soon.
It's the only way to validate dynamically-generated pages BEFORE they are

I like the way your HTML / XHTML validator has the "upload" and "URL"
options on the same page. In the HTML / XHTML validator, could you:
*	add the "direct" option on the same page (http://validator.w3.org/).
*	add a mini-menu above all of the forms, e.g.

		You can validate your HTML by:
		.	entering a URL [link to URL form]
		.	uploading a fine from you computer
			[link to upload form]
		.	entering HTML directly
			[link to direct form]
			Entering HTML directly is most useful
			for checking dynamically-generated HTML

Your CSS validator (http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/) has a similar

I think that by maximising ease of use and providing a clear statement of
the options you will encourage more people to validate their mark-up - even
those who already think they are good at HTML / XHTML!

I think the top-of-page message should use normal font. On most computer
screens italics harder to read because the dot-pitch makes them look fuzzy.

Some thoughts about the introductory text (less important than the previous
*	It could be a little snappier, e.g. "The W3C Mark-up Validation Service
checks documents like HTML and XHTML for conformance to W3C Recommendations
and other standards - and it's free." (I'd delete "Welcome .." because it's
does nothing for the user, rather like the infamous "click here".)
*	It contains some rather vague phrases (still present in my suggestion
above), which might put newcomers off:
	-	"documents like HTML and XHTML". Can you list all the supported
	-	"W3C Recommendations and other standards." Which other standards? Why are
they important? (I've only heard of the W3C Recommendations) [links to "more
information about ..." pages]
*	It should sell the benefits, especially to newcomers, e.g.:
	-	Pages will be laid out correctly on a wider range of software (browsers,
etc.) and hardware (e.g. hand-held devices as well as desktop computers)
[links to pages about user agents and platforms - but avoid the phrase "user
agents and platforms"].
	-	You need valid mark-up as a base for validating your CSS [link to your
CSS validator].
	-	If you use Javascript / VBscript, starting with valid mark-up and CSS may
save you a lot of debugging - it's frustrating to spend hours de-bugging a
script and then find that an object is missing or incorrect because of a
mark-up or CSS error.

I'd place the "benefits" section below the "URL / upload / direct" mini-menu
because many users of your service will know this already - the "benefits"
section is for people who are new to at least one of HTML / CSS /
validation. So the order I'd prefer would be:
*	"The W3C Mark-up Validation Service checks ..."
*	"URL / upload / direct" mini-menu
*	Benefits and any other explanations
*	Validation forms.

Sorry this message has gone on so long. At first I thought validation was a
pain (it sounds rather like spelling lessons) and only hard experience
taught me the benefits. I'd like to shorten the cycle for others.

Best wishes,

	Philip Chalmers

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.797 / Virus Database: 541 - Release Date: 15/11/04
Received on Tuesday, 23 November 2004 15:13:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 14:17:43 UTC