- From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2004 21:32:26 +0200
- To: olivier Thereaux <ot@w3.org>
- Cc: validators community <www-validator@w3.org>
* olivier Thereaux wrote: >> My alternate format differs in the following ways: >> * it groups identical error messages, this helps to identify > >This is a nice addition indeed. "Ideally" we'd find a way to do both, >at the user's discretion. Yes... Ideally we would have the subscription feature as noted in the todo list. There are a number of things that could greatly be customized but customization is basically useless without means to store these preferences, you would not click dozens of checkboxes each time you run the validator. >Fair enough. Your demo shows that you can show the problem in the >source by putting it next to the error message. I still think that at >least an option should make it possible to see the whole source, as it >gives context, but that's just MHO. I thought about providing more context through another expand/collapse feature, you could click the single line source fragment and see more of the surrounding source, or you could inline the messages in the source code. Maybe a title='...' with more source code would be helpfull, too. Though I am not sure about this. A number of problems can be solved if the validator would report the current open element(s) like Tidy does Warning: <a> proprietary attribute "linkarea" or instead of end tag for element "HEAD" which is not open something like end tag for element "HEAD" which is not open (open: html, body) or something along these lines.
Received on Friday, 16 April 2004 15:32:57 UTC