I agree!! It is very much "in the eye of the beholder." I'm not a fan of
the NU and very much prefer the w3 validator. I much prefer the way the
results are displayed in the w3 validator. The NU validator displays them
in a manner that is too busy with all of the different formatting for the
various parts of an error message. I also like that the w3 validator gives
you a summary of how many errors/ warnings were found at the top of the
displayed results.
--Anna Marie
On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 2:32 AM, Philip Taylor <P.Taylor@rhul.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>
> Jonny Grant wrote:
>
> It seems like the NU validator is better, so maybe this can just be the
> default?
>
> "Better" is very much in the eye of the beholder, and as one who
> invariably authors in HTML 4.01 Strict unless I /need/ HTML 5 features, I
> for one would find it a complete disaster if the validator were to switch
> to the NU variant for pre-HTML 5 validation.
> --
>
> Philip Taylor
>
--
*Anna Marie Golden, MHCID*
*Master of Human-Computer Interaction + Design, Class of 2014*
*IT Accessibility Specialist*
*Accessible Technology Services, UW-IT(206) 221-4164*
*Mailing Address:Box 354842University of Washington*
*Seattle, WA 98195-4842*
*Street Address:*
*4545 Building*
*4545 - 15th Avenue NE, Suite 100*
*Seattle, Washington 98105*
