|
|
Posted by Craig on 08/10/07 22:29
Ben C wrote:
> On 2007-08-10, Albert Wiersch <donotreply@123donotreply123.com> wrote:
>> "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> wrote in message
>> news:pmLui.204798$ln1.192950@reader1.news.saunalahti.fi...
>>> - -
>>>> This is a very good HTML editor.
>>> Check Google Groups for alt.html discussions on this phoney "validator".
>> And be sure to read the discussion as to why "validator" makes sense
>> to most people (say 99% of them) and why the program is often bashed
>> by a small number of people who don't like the name.
>
> It's not just the name. I object to the program and everything it stands
> for.
>
>> The people who talk bad about it also don't really know anything about
>> CSE HTML Validator, except they like to bash it.
>
> It's not that I _like_ to bash it. I consider it a duty.
Ben or Jukka;
Would either of you be willing to outline the criticisms that Ben's
referring to? The best I can gather so far, one criticism is that CSE
refers to its syntax checker(?) as a validator, a name usually ascribed
to the W3C site functions.
tia,
-Craig
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|