Re: W3C Validator vs Schneegans

Piotr Nowicki wrote:

> I'm writing to you because of some information I've heard about using
> W3C Validator. In fact I was accustomed to your product, but
> recently I've heard that documents that passed W3C validator didn't
> have to be validate at all.

Well, the validator itself links to
<>, and
<> was
discussed on this list, too.

> On few pages I've found a link to other validator written by Christoph
> Schneegans ( which ought to be more
> accurate.

Very few indeed. :-)

> I've tested it on one of my XHTML 1.1 documents (converted to XHTML
> 1.0 because Shneegans XML schema validator doesn't support version 1.1)
> and really - it pointed a number of errors in my document that passed
> W3C validation.
> I would like to know why it's like that?

Mainly because of the limitations of SP's XML support and the benefits
of XML Schema, see <>.

> I fully trust W3C Validator, and I wish this situation won't change.

<> is already on its way.

<>                                              |

Received on Saturday, 3 September 2005 21:39:07 UTC