Re: XHTML validation

On Tuesday, June 13, 2000 at 07:57, bertilow@hem.passagen.se (Bertilo Wennergren) wrote:

> > Work needs to be done on the W3C validator if it is ever going to be able
> > to validate XHTML. Read this message from Gerald Oskoboiny that addresses
> > this issue to some extent:
> 
> > <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-validator/2000JanMar/0166.html>
> 
> That discussion does not really adrress the current issue. It only talks
> about a few special cases where errors might slip through.

It does point to the fact that W3C is aware of serious problems with the
current validator and they are look to fix this. At least that is my
reading of Gerald's statement:

	That doesn't seem good, indeed. I thought SP's XML limitations
	sounded like obscure things that wouldn't come up much in
	practice, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

	I guess I'll have to have a look at expat or something else as a
	replacement.

Of course I may be reading more into what Gerald said than he meant.

> > That all said, if you want to validate your XHTML files right now, try
> > the HTMLHelp validator at
> 
> > <http://www.htmlhelp.com/tools/validator/>
> 
> You could try it all right, but it's broken. Try it on this test page:
> 
>   <http://www.concinnity.se/bertilow/div/testform.htm>

The page is not valid XHTML and the HTMLHelp validator does catch the
error. Reread the XHTML 1.0 DTD and you should be able to find the problem.

I have not yet been able to find an example of in-valid XHTML that is
passed by the HTMLHelp validator nor an example of valid XHTML which
triggers an error.

> Tidy is broken too...

Tidy is not a validator. It is a linter. 

-- 
Christian Smith  |  csmith@barebones.com  |  http://web.barebones.com
PGP Fingerprint  -  60E5 2216 97D2 1D1A B923 F036 00A9 CEC0 D411 FA89

Received on Tuesday, 13 June 2000 08:14:02 UTC