Re: checklink:

Roger Darlington wrote:
> It failed to check about 80% of the html links, claiming that it had 
> reached the maximum numberr of documents.
> 
> what a pathetic excus. why don't you incresae that number??

Bandwidth and processing power isn't free, and the W3C QA tools, which
are free for the public to use, and don't get a whole lot of funding (
http://www.molly.com/2008/12/11/w3c-validators-in-jeopardy/ ).

If you want to check a large number of documents, then I suggest you
install your own copy of the link checker (there's a download link at
the top of the link checker homepage) instead of complaining that you
aren't getting enough out of the free service.



-- 
David Dorward                               <http://dorward.me.uk/>

Received on Thursday, 1 January 2009 17:19:22 UTC