- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 18:22:34 +0300
- To: Jirka Kosek <jirka@kosek.cz>
- Cc: www-validator@w3.org, Osmo Saarikumpu <osmo@kotikone.fi>
On Aug 31, 2005, at 14:09, Jirka Kosek wrote: > Osmo Saarikumpu wrote: > >> BTW, I have to agree w. the view that Relaxed should not be called a >> validator. Perhaps "the HTML checker"? > > It seems that people on this list are too bound to HTML/XHTML. > Validation in SGML/XML sense is simply process of checking document > against its grammar. It is irrelevant whether this grammar is > expressed in DTD, RELAX NG or W3C XML Schema. ... > I don't think that problem is name "validator" per se, but fact that > many people are unable to see distinction between validity and > conformance. Considering my observations about the reactions to Relaxed and to my validation service, I think it would be easier to market Relaxed if the word validator was not qualified by the name of any language whose normative schema formalism is DTD. That is, saying "Relaxed - a RELAX NG and Schematron validator for (X)HTML" instead of "Relaxed - the HTML validator" would make the title a lot easier to defend against pedants. I have had only one SGMList complain about me calling my validation service a validator. -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Wednesday, 31 August 2005 15:22:50 UTC