- From: olivier Thereaux <ot@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2007 10:46:00 +0900
- To: Daniel Barclay <daniel@fgm.com>
- Cc: www-validator-css@w3.org
Hi Daniel, Thank you for this thoughtful and detailed message. On Mar 9, 2007, at 04:58 , Daniel Barclay wrote: > At a higher level, what seems to have been broken or not followed > is the principle of having each resource identified by a URI (as > recommended by _Architecture of the World Wide Web, Volume One_ > at http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#uri-benefits). I don't think this has anything to do with web architecture. The resource "results of validation for http://www.example.com (validated with options foo and bar)" is properly identified by a URI, and can be bookmarked, mailed, etc. This is different from a lot of scripting- heavy sites. The question here is one of user interface, not of web architecture. I do understand your concern UI-wise, hence this discussion, however. > Why not have the default settings generate a page without warnings, > and (assuming you still want the page generated with default settings > to have easy access to the warnings), make the warnings heading/link > be a (regular) link to a page with the warnings? > > Hey, this might be better: > That is, when the user clicks on the Warnings link to display the > warnings that are already contained in the returned HTML, also display > a link with a URI that will retrieve the page with the warnings > displayed (not hidden). > > > ... At this point I've been > > experimenting with a slightly adapted look and feel for the Markup > > Validator: > > http://qa-dev.w3.org/wmvs/HEAD/check?uri=http%3A%2F% > 2Fwww.apple.com%2F;ss;st > > > > Would this also work for the CSS validator? Would it be better > than what > > we have at present? > > I'm not sure which aspect of it you're asking about. I am asking about the way the results are displayed, and specifically about the bar at the top with links to particular aspects of the results. I reckon this is closer to what you would like to see for the CSS validator. Hence my pointing it to you. > However, I do notice two problems: > > 1. Something in the page structure prevents the browser from wrapping > the wrappable text (the error message text, e.g., "You have used > the attribute named above...") to fit the browser window. The > page requires the user to scroll horizontally more that the user > should have to do so. This is because of a very long line without any space in the source display, making the viewport extremely wide. It does not generally happen, e.g http://qa-dev.w3.org/wmvs/HEAD/check?uri=http://qa-dev.w3.org/wmvs/ HEAD/dev/tests/xhtml1-bogus-element.html;ss > 2. The Cleaned-Up Source section has a serious usability problem > because it tries to do scrolling internally: That is not a bug, it's a feature. Unlike the source display above, the tidied source is there to be copy-pasted, not looked at extensively. This is why it is put in a pre, with scrolling overflow, to avoid making the global window too large (something you agree is a usability problem, see your comment above). Thank you, -- olivier
Received on Friday, 9 March 2007 01:46:28 UTC