- From: Terje Bless <link@pobox.com>
- Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2002 18:50:08 +0100
- To: W3C Validator <www-validator@w3.org>
- cc: Tex Texin <tex@XenCraft.com>
Tex Texin <tex@i18nguy.com> wrote:
>Also the todo list http://validator.w3.org/todo.html entertains link
>checking, "fixing" html and perhaps other items suggesting more than
>pure validation.
Yes, these are items on the TODO list. They're there because these would be
usefull and valuable features to have. But they are _still_ on the TODO
list -- as opposed to having been implemented -- because they are
orthogonal to the main purpose of the Validator.
>And, there are other products that do lint checking
>that are calling themselves validators...
Yes, this is one of our major problems. Very few of the "lints" out there
actually acknowledge that they are in fact "linters" and not -- as the
Validator aspires to be -- a formal validator. This distinction has
typically been hard to communicate, and is not helped by the other common
misconception that either tool is sufficient by itself.
>In any event, I claim there is a popular (mis)conception about the
>purpose of the W3C validator and a sentence or two would clarify that.
I agree. Unfortunately I don't think "a sentence or two" is sufficient for
this purpose.
--
Interviewer: "In what language do you write your algorithms?"
Abigail: English.
Interviewer: "What would you do if, say, Telnet didn't work?"
Abigail: Look at the error message.
Received on Sunday, 24 November 2002 12:50:13 UTC