- From: Tobias Reif <tobiasreif@pinkjuice.com>
- Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 19:27:03 +0100
- To: Nick Kew <nick@webthing.com>
- CC: Terje Bless <link@pobox.com>, W3C Validator <www-validator@w3.org>
Nick Kew wrote: >>It would be best if several choices would be offered to the user: >> > I'm not sure about that. For most users, surely the inner workings > are of little relevance? It's a fact that no validator is perfect. Offering several choices simply increases the quality of the service; if one validator misses an error, the other one might catch it. > Those who know or care about the difference > are likely to be well able to run the tools locally. Sure I do, but I use online services like the W3C validator when reporting the status of a page to a client, eg via pages such as http://www.pinkjuice.com/check/ >> * Xerces-C (eg DOMCount or other Xerces-based) >> * Xerces-J >> > Xerces has (AFAIK) the most complete support for XML validation of > any (free) software, and is the basis for the forthcoming service > as well as the existing service at http://valet.webthing.com/ . libxml's xmllint also is a great validator. Both had and probably have their issues and bugs. Tobi -- http://www.pinkjuice.com/
Received on Tuesday, 10 December 2002 13:28:47 UTC