Posted by Harlan Messinger on 10/12/06 18:32

Jeremy wrote:
> I am using Firefox with the developer tools for validating the
> documents. I can get a clean bill of health on there but then when I
> paste the document into (as an example) the validator here
> http://validator.w3.org/ I get presented with a bunch more issues (such
> as the document not being valid XHTML 1.0 Transitional.
>
> That's fine, I have no problems with needing to correct the code, but i
> do wonder about the reliability of these checkers - I would assume that
> the one at w3.org would be the definitive?
>
> I have also been playing with CSE HTML Validator Lite 3.5, which again
> finds errors/warnings that the Firefox validator misses.

The creator of CSE HTML "Validator" has argued speciously on Usenet as
to why he calls his application a "validator" despite the fact that it
isn't one under the technical definition of the word. He doesn't flag
syntax errors that he considers to be acceptable in real usage, while at
the same time providing warnings and error messages about issues that
may violate provisions in the spec that fall outside of the scope of a
DTD, and about other matters where best practice may call for changes.

[Back to original message]