- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2004 19:08:06 +0000
- To: www-validator-cvs@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=875 xtian@neonbikini.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|REOPENED |RESOLVED Resolution| |INVALID ------- Additional Comments From xtian@neonbikini.com 2004-09-11 19:08 ------- You got it. I erroneously thought the validator checked both the embedded css and the xhtml markup. I was entirely unaware of the other validator. To recap: 1.) I checked the file in the validator, and noticed the css error {bottom 0px;}. 2.) I made a copy of the file and rechecked the validator with a gross error {bottom sexy woman;}. It returned an error. (NOTE, I have been unsuccessful to recreate this error.) 3.) I logged the bug http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=875. 4.) The comment made that my css had an error further supported my version of the bug report in 3. The correction was misleading because it missed the reason for the report: validating css and missed that I was using the xhtml validator to check css. I guess no good deed goes unpunished. I will add a last comment that the validator not checking embedded css is unexpected. This does not benefit newcomers in any way. While it is possible to separate style from markup, it is not required for CSS2. It is permissible to embed css in the head and in elements. Within what parameters can I expect the validator to operate? If a user agent can parse xhtml, I would fully expect the validator to do the same. It's ridiculous to imagine that the xhtml validator can not check embedded css. I hope to find a programming solution that is more sophisticated then creating a separate css file if only to check embedded css. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
Received on Saturday, 11 September 2004 19:08:07 UTC