- From: Matthew Paul Thomas <mpt@myrealbox.com>
- Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 15:52:01 +1200
- To: www-validator@w3.org
The W3C Validator is much more helpful than it was five years ago, and it's great that it can now validate HTTPS URLs. However, some details are still aggravating. For example, in a page of validation results I received this error: Error Line 147 column 29: required attribute "alt" not specified. <img src="/@@/user.gif"> The attribute given above is required for an element that you've used, but you have omitted it. The validator knows very well that "The attribute given above" is the alt attribute, and it knows very well that "an element" is the img element, so it needn't be so vague. What the validator *doesn't* know is whether it's "an element that you've used" or whether "you have omitted it": I might be validating someone else's page, or dealing with an obnoxious attribute-stripping CMS. Correct all those errors, and you'd end up with something like "The alt attribute is missing from this img element", but that would merely be a more helpful rewording of the error itself. Conclusion: reword the error message to include the element name, then drop the first sentence from the hint. Unfortunately the rest of the hint is even worse: For instance, in most HTML and XHTML document types the "type" attribute is required on the "script" element and the "alt" attribute is required for the "img" element. Typical values for type are type="text/css" for <style> and type="text/javascript" for <script>. The validator knows very well that the problem is with a missing alt= attribute, not with an incorrect type= attribute, so chatting away about "typical values for type" does little except make the validator seem buggy. It would be great to offer attribute-specific suggestions for this error, but until that is implemented, it would be better to stay silent than to deliberately discuss irrelevant things. Cheers -- Matthew Paul Thomas http://mpt.net.nz/
Received on Sunday, 30 April 2006 12:50:45 UTC