W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > December 2001

Re: "valid [X]HTML x.x!" icons are Evil (was Re: Thanks a lot)

From: James Ralston <qralston+ml.www-validator@andrew.cmu.edu>
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 13:38:47 -0500 (EST)
To: Nick Kew <nick@webthing.com>
cc: Lloyd Wood <l.wood@eim.surrey.ac.uk>, webmaster <webmaster@domovina.net>, www-validator <www-validator@w3.org>, Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0112201328320.12982-100000@pcmy.sei.cmu.edu>
On Mon, 17 Dec 2001, Nick Kew wrote:
> Isn't the purpose of the icon to propagate the notion that
> validation, or more generally standards-compliance, is a Good Thing?

Yes, and it's a noble goal, but asking web authors to propagate that
notion by *explicitly advertising their pages as being valid* is a
horrible injustice, when the W3C darn well *knows* that a future
change of theirs might invalidate countless of pages with the "valid
[X]HTML x.x!" icons on them.

I'd really like to see someone from the W3C comment on my original
"'valid [X]HTML x.x!' icons are Evil" post.  (Perhaps it's being
discussed, but from my point of view, all I hear is crickets

James Ralston, Information Technology
Software Engineering Institute
Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Received on Thursday, 20 December 2001 13:40:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:58:25 UTC