- From: John Dunlop <john@johndunlop.info>
- Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 21:21:38 +0000
- To: www-validator@w3.org
Philip TAYLOR [PC87S-O/XP] wrote: > I understand both the questioner's and the responders points, > but what is less clear is why the validator proposes the use > of <P> tags at all; surely the recommendation to insert code > would be less likely to cause errors and/or confuision > if it restricted itself to recommending solely the <IMG ...> > tag with a caveat about "in a suitable context" ? I agree that would be better [1]. That way, one tactfully steps around arguments over whether "Valid HTML 4.01!" really constitutes a paragraph. Would providing no markup excerpts be even better? Incidentally, the :8001 version -- the markup language of the checked document being either HTML *or* XHTML -- commandingly announces, "Here is the HTML you should use to add this icon to your Web page". I'd substitute "could" for "should", at least. The :80 version uses "could". [1] Forgetting for a moment the convincing arguments against validation icons. -- Jock
Received on Monday, 23 February 2004 16:15:25 UTC