Re: web site programming.

I would be surprised if a WYSIWYG user understands the concept of
validation to begin with.

I think you have a good idea and those stats would be interesting to
know -- however, to track this sort of thing publicly promoting
WYSIWYG editors on one of the most visited W3C pages probably is
counter-productive. I'm sure others here would agree.

-
ae
(apologies for the flame)


On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 1:24 AM, Rick Merrill <rickmerrill@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>  "vary with the skill of the user"?!  You've not considered the vast
> majority of
>  users who expect the "tool" to be perfect and the user does not Know HTML
>  At-All.  I'd just like to see the Validator enter the main stream and make
> a difference
>  for people.  Right now the tool developers don't seem to care if their code
> validates.
>
>  And the Big League web sites - how about validating
>  http://www.google.com/
>  ???????????????!
>
>  http://www.yahoo.com/
>  ?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
>  - RM
>
>
>
>  David Dorward wrote:
>
> >
> > On 1 May 2008, at 20:53, Rick Merrill wrote:
> >
> > > I have a suggestion to float: How about adding a summary
> > > page on the Validator web site where users (like us) can
> > > add Validator results based on what software was used.
> > >
> >
> >
> > Leaving aside the question of the Validator team publishing what is,
> effectively, a critique of various software packages, I don't think this is
> a good idea. As statistics go, it simply isn't a very useful one. You
> wouldn't be comparing like with like - the number of errors produced would
> vary with the skill of the user, and the content and size of each page.
> >
> >
>
>  --
>  http://www.batco.tv
>
>
>
>



-- 
Anthony Ettinger
408-656-2473
http://anthony.ettinger.name

Received on Friday, 2 May 2008 08:33:28 UTC