W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > January 2006

Error Message Feedback

From: webmaster <webmaster@amelox.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 11:26:31 -0800
To: <www-validator@w3.org>
Message-ID: <000a01c622ae$69ac9610$0c02a8c0@rolfdedba31001>

Validating

[ Add your message/question here.
  Follow the instructions at
http://validator.w3.org/feedback.html#errormsg ]

I appreciate the answer by David Dorwad.

However -- as far as <TABLE> is concerned there appears to be a
disconnect between
your published standard and what the industry practices in their
browsers.

My HTML editor does not allow <TBODY>, <THEAD> or <TFOOT> and if I force
it then I.E.-6 does not display correctly.
Also, <CAPTION> is allowed for all four sides, not just one time as you
proclaim. Why would it not?
<THEAD> is replaced by <TH> and it works as intended.
<BORDERCOLOR> is also recognized and displayed very well.
<COLS> you claim is not allowed but HTML editors recognize it as legal.
Why would it not be if it helps the browser to process the TABLE request
faster?

Guys, maybe you were there first, but Microsoft decided to do it
differently. And Microsoft wins since it has 97% of the market.  Perhaps
you should adapt or risk becoming irrelevant in the future?

Just a thought.
Rolf Seebach


Hi guys,
1)  I find that the validator does not like TABLE <CAPTION> (top and
bottom) but, of course, it displays well with it.
2)  TABLE <HEADER> is supposedly illegal, but it works just fine.
3)  It also does not like TABLE BORDERCOLOR even though the color is
displayed perfectly.
4)  The same goes for HR color.  I.E. displays the color even though the
validator thinks its invalid.

URL = http://www.amelox.com/study.htm

Otherwise the Validator is a life saver.  Congratulations on a job well
done.

So how about bringing the validator up to the current standard?

Thanks, Rolf Seebach
Received on Thursday, 26 January 2006 19:33:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 25 April 2012 12:14:20 GMT