- From: Christoph Schneegans <Christoph@Schneegans.de>
- Date: Sat, 03 Sep 2005 21:36:40 GMT
- To: <www-validator@w3.org>
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 <http://openjade.sourceforge.net/doc/xml.htm>, and <http://esw.w3.org/topic/MarkupValidator/XML_Limitations> was discussed on this list, too. > On few pages I've found a link to other validator written by Christoph > Schneegans (http://schneegans.de/sv/) 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 <http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1-schema/#diffs>. > I fully trust W3C Validator, and I wish this situation won't change. <http://esw.w3.org/topic/MarkupValidator/M12N> is already on its way. -- <http://schneegans.de/> |
Received on Saturday, 3 September 2005 21:39:07 UTC