- From: Jukka K. Korpela <jukkakk@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2022 08:21:49 +0200
- To: "Miguel Casquilho (Lisboa)" <mcasquilho@tecnico.ulisboa.pt>
- Cc: W3C WWW Validator <www-validator@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAGHxYa7um1NgU-G-3BwDnppjYPMMB1cnmtnWqJO8ycsi0PhnQA@mail.gmail.com>
Miguel Casquilho (Lisboa) (mcasquilho@tecnico.ulisboa.pt) wrote: > > If you look at this experimental page, where I introduced an error on > purpose, > *http://web.tecnico.ulisboa.pt/~mcasquilho/compute/CISTI_2023/sliders.php > <http://web.tecnico.ulisboa.pt/~mcasquilho/compute/CISTI_2023/sliders.php>* > you get an (obvious) error with "validator.w3.org" and no error with " > validator.nu". I wrote "kenter" instead of "center". > So, is the scope of "validator.nu" only structural ? > It’s more complicated. As far as I understand the situation, 1) validator.w3.org is mostly a DTD-based formal validator, with some additional functionality (added checks), which is not publicly documented and which has varied quite a bit 2) validator.nu is a schema-based validator, but 3) for a document that declares HTML5 (or ”Living HTML” or whatever you call it) with <!doctype html>, validator.w3.org switches to schema-based validation (HTML5 cannot be described with a DTD), which is based on validator.nu code but not identical to it; in particular, it may contain additional functionality (as in item 1). Both DTD-based and schema-based validation are “only structural” in the sense of applying formal rules, using two different formalisms. But additional functionality may involve things that are outside the scope of such validation. CSS code, even when embedded in a <style> element, is not HTML (or markup in general), and it is completely out of scope for both DTD-based and schema-based validation. However, the additional functionality in validator.w3.org includes CSS checking, presumably by running (some version of) the W3C CSS validator on the content of HTML elements and attributes defined to contain CSS code. Even though such CSS checking may appear useful, you can get a more adequate CSS checking by using directly https://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/ which, in this case, will report the error similarly but also issues some warnings about vendor extensions (which may be needed for better browser coverage, but still deviate from CSS specs). Jukka, https://jkorpela.fi
Received on Tuesday, 1 March 2022 06:27:21 UTC