Posted by Albert Wiersch on 08/18/05 02:30

"Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> wrote in message
news:Xns96B5E741AA955jkorpelacstutfi@193.229.0.31...
>
>> but it should be clear how limited a real validator is
>
> It performs a well-defined job, as opposite to looking here and there and
> making proposals and issuing error messages based on someone's opinions.

Which is fine if you want to limit yourself to what is "well-defined" and
ignore other potential issues like bgcolor="dfsdgfdsfgdfg".

>
>> and that HTML linters and checkers can find many issues that real
>> validators can't.
>
> You mean like the non-issue that your phoney validator reports as an
> error?
> It's sad that there are no good HTML linters (actually never were), but
> it's probably too late now. That, however, is not a reason to pay for a
> broken checker called, in an intentionally misleading way, a validator.

It seems like you've never used my validator, or don't understand it (or,
more likely, you can't get over the fact that it doesn't conform to your
chosen definition of validator). If it points out an issue that is not
really an issue, then feel free to bring it to my attention. I may change
it. You can also configure it as you want on a per-message basis.

>
>> This is just one of the cases where a "non-real" validator found what
>> you would call a "futile" attribute. Obviously it is not good form to
>> use futile attributes.
>
> That's your opinion. It is based on limited experience with the practice
> of
> HTML authoring. And it is certainly objectively wrong to call a futile
> attribute an error when it in fact conforms to any relevant specification.

I don't limit the definition of "error" to what is only technically wrong.
Again, it just seems you have a problem with the name of the program and
"error" which means, according to the dictionary "a mistake" or "deviation
from what is correct", among other definitions.

> I see little reason to remove futile attributes, if a document contains
> them as by-products of some HTML generator or as holdovers from some
> previous version of the document where they were not futile, or maybe in
> preparation for the next version that will drop the "f" from futility.

Then you can disable the message in CSE HTML Validator and use all the
futile attributes you want in hopes that they become useful, or for whatever
other reason you want.

Anyhow, I'm not going to continue this argument. It's lost its usefulness to
the group.

--
Albert Wiersch
http://www.htmlvalidator.com/

[Back to original message]