- From: Terje Bless <link@pobox.com>
- Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 07:56:44 +0100
- To: W3C Validator <www-validator@w3.org>
- cc: Michael Hamm // LookTwo <michaelh@looktwo.com>
Michael Hamm // LookTwo <michaelh@looktwo.com> wrote:
>I'm glad I found the XHTML Validation Service; very useful. I do,
>however, have one complaint. On the page that alerts a user to an
>invalid document, the message "This page is not Valid XHTML 1.0
>Transitional!" appears on reddish/purple background with a blue link
>("XHTML 1.0"). The combination of these two colors make it difficult to
>see clearly. Perhaps use a lighter blue link for the error message?
We've somewhat lightened the blue in current development code and hopefully
that will address this issue. Please do let us know if it is still hard to
read after the next maintenance release (as yet unscheduled).
Thanks for the feedback on this.
--
Yes, Micro$oft products work extremely well after you lobotomize yourself,
affect a zombie-like stare, and forever chant the "Micro$oft-knows-best"
mantra until your soul dissolves and you start believing all their crap.
Received on Monday, 9 December 2002 01:56:51 UTC