|
|
Posted by Mark Parnell on 08/11/05 02:34
Previously in alt.html, Albert Wiersch
<mrinternetnewsREMOVEUPPERCASETOREPLY@wiersch.com> said:
> The basis used by CSE HTML Validator is a combination of the HTML
> specification, DTDs, browser extensions, user issues and problems that have
> come up over time, and what works in the real world.
An admirable list.
> It's put together by
> myself and is extremely useful in writing good HTML.
I'll not deny that.
> Much more so than just
> a DTD validator, at least in my opinion (and many others). I certainly would
> never limit myself to checking HTML documents using only a DTD validator.
I have no problem with that. Though no program is ever going to be a
substitute for testing it properly in browsers yourself.
> For example, a document like the following is completely valid according to
> a DTD validator, even though it contains numerous problems.
Yes. But it *is* still valid. There is a big difference between validity
and good practice (which you obviously realise), and CSE attempts to
bridge that gap. But that doesn't make it a validator.
> http://www.htmlvalidator.com/htmlval/whycseisbetter.html
I'm sure that when I've looked at CSE in the past, it didn't actually
check the validity of the document. Looking at that page, it looks like
perhaps it now does.
Does CSE check the validity of the HTML against the DTD, as well as
checking for other potential problems? If so, then I have no problem
with it being called a validator, though it certainly is much more than
that.
--
Mark Parnell
http://www.clarkecomputers.com.au
alt.html FAQ :: http://html-faq.com/
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|