- From: Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com>
- Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2003 12:46:00 -0700
- To: Terje Bless <link@pobox.com>
- Cc: W3C Validator <www-validator@w3.org>
On Saturday, August 30, 2003, at 11:26 AM, Terje Bless wrote: > As feedback is predominantly that the term «fussy» is unfortunate in > many ways > — obscure, inaccurate, unfamiliar to non-native readers, excessively > «geeky», > and with unfortunate connotations; seems to be the general consensus — > I would > very much like to see suggestions for new names for this feature. > > The concept it should get across, in two or preferably a single word, > is that > of applying stricter, perhaps excessively so, rules; that does use > still the > process of validation, but without implying anything about the formal > validity > or lack of it in the results. You are thinking about this the wrong way. It is not "more fussy" or "more picky" or "more conservative" or "more pedantic" as some have suggested. The new mode is _more helpful_, as it addresses real problems which would otherwise be missed by the validator and the Web developer. Applying a "negative" (or "elitist") adjective to this mode is a very bad idea. Instead, you should be looking for positive terms which point out that this mode assists the user in any number of helpful ways. No good suggestions offhand, but I hope that if I can realign the group's thinking on this mode, some of the rest of you out there will be able to come up with the best term to use. :) --Kynn -- Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com> http://kynn.com Chief Technologist, Idyll Mountain http://idyllmtn.com Author, CSS in 24 Hours http://cssin24hours.com Shock & Awe Blog http://shock-awe.info Inland Anti-Empire Blog http://inlandantiempire.org
Received on Saturday, 30 August 2003 15:49:33 UTC