- From: Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de>
- Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2008 15:23:49 +0200
- To: www-validator@w3.org
- Cc: www-html-editor@w3.org
Olivier Thereaux wrote: > most people seem to hate getting warnings from the validators. > I find that terribly disturbing, since warnings are meant to > say "please double check this as it might be an issue, might > not" and the reactions to these warnings show a very wrong > "religious" attitude towards the validation results. NAK: Warnings about issues users might be unable to change and not necessarily interested to validate are excessively annoying. One of the HTTP servers I use claims that any text/html it sends is Latin 1. For whatever reasons, it is lying, and I want to validate an ASCII or windows-1252 page, not the braindead HTTP server. It starts to get surreal when a validator says that it will ignore windows-1252 treating the input as Latin-1, and then emits "non-SGML char" warnings for octet 0x80 (hi Nikita). > It certainly makes it difficult for us to add to the validator > features which would help improve web quality, even if they > are not normative requirements. There simply are no HTTP servers for ordinary users allowing to upload .htaccess files, and there are no HTTP servers getting it right without manual intervention. Some days ago I was very excited when googlepages allowed me to upload a .htaccess file, not the usual "forbidden name" blurb, but it turned out that it simply stripped the dot and ignored the content... :-( Frank
Received on Monday, 21 April 2008 13:22:01 UTC