Validator program

[Sherm Pendley]

At no time did I ever claim that CSE HTML Validator's own validation
engine was a DTD based validator.

That's exactly what you claim, when you call it a validator.

Therefore, I strongly recommend that you stop
calling people liars

I will when you stop lying.

especially when you have no proof.

The proof is the name of your fraudulent product.

I know you have no
proof because I know I never said that CSE HTML Validator's own
engine was a DTD based validator.

If it's not DTD based, it's not a validator. It's a lint checker.

sherm--

 

[Sherm Pendley]

Because I've always kept it simple I think is the reason I've been
able to use CSE. Ok, maybe it's not as high class as I need, but
till now, I didn't even known the difference. It does what I need,
who cares.

I think you're still missing the point a bit. It's not about "class,"
or about whether CSE performs a useful function or not. It's about
truth in advertising - I don't like the fact that CSE was originally
advertised as something that it was not.

Even considering that the "pro" version now has a validator, Albert's
own honesty is still in question. He didn't add the validator until he
was forced to do so, to live up to his claims about his product. Do
you want to do business with someone who's only honest when he has no
other choice? I don't.

There are plenty of good tools out there - you don't need to support
dishonest people to lint-check or validate your site.

sherm--

 

[Harlan Messinger]

Most people want their HTML to display well in real-world browsers and that
is the main purpose of CSE HTML Validator.

When "non-standard" constructs are used, CSE HTML Validator will notify the
developer. The developer can choose to use it anyway or can change the
message to an error message and decide not to use it. CSE HTML Validator
leaves it up to the developer to decide how they want their site to be.

What good is a standard if it's not followed in the real world? What good is
a web page that is designed to the standards if it doesn't work in
real-world browsers? CSE HTML Validator tries to let developers know about
issues such as these:

1. Constructs that work in the real-world but are not standards compliant.
2. Standards compliant constructs that don't work with real-world browsers.

Again, the developer gets to choose how to handle these issues with regards
to accepting them anyway or removing them.

I'm amazed by how many times you've offered responses like these to
objections that no one has raised, while ignoring the fact that none of
this has anything to do whatsoever with what the technical term
"validator" means, the objection that *has* been raised.

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

What good is a standard if it's not followed in the real world?

Why bother having stands, eh?

What good is
a web page that is designed to the standards if it doesn't work in
real-world browsers? CSE HTML Validator tries to let developers know about
issues such as these:

1. Constructs that work in the real-world but are not standards compliant.

Because *those* constructs are as subject to change at the whim of the
browser author and your page may be break in the future[1] (We are
talking about MSIE right?)

2. Standards compliant constructs that don't work with real-world browsers.

Again, we are talking about MSIE right?

New flash Albert: MS is supposedly pushing towards getting IE 8
standards compliant. Whether they are successful on not for IE 8, (they
may get it right for 9, 10 or 11), but the point is your "real world
validation" only prolongs the bad practice of using proprietary
constructs instead of striving to be standards compliant. It give the
ignorant the false sense of security that their pages are properly
constructed and that is the real harm of your product.

 

[Harlan Messinger]

I've addressed that objection multiple times. I don't see the need to
continually repeat it in every message.

What's the point of repeating information that *doesn't* address the
objection every time the objection is mentioned?

Your responses that do address the objection that's been raised haven't
done anything to undermine that objection.

 

[Harlan Messinger]

What are the pros? Can you provide some actual examples of non-standard
constructs that you would advise using?

The use of the <wbr> tag has sometimes been recommended here.

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

What are the pros? Can you provide some actual examples of non-standard
constructs that you would advise using?

The "pros" are reflected in his bank account ;-) other than that there
is not any advantage to a real web developer that wishes for his page to
work both for today and tomorrow.

BTW, if done properly a page can be standards compliant, not be support
by IE but still be usable in IE by properly degrading... Then when|if MS
gets their act together the page will display constantly among all
browsers...

 

[Sherm Pendley]

I don't know what your problem is with Albert and I don't care.

I told you what my problem with him is - he's dishonest. You don't
care about truth in advertising?

Your name is going to the same place Guy put mine. In the kill
file.

Whatever. If you'd rather hear dishonest sales pitches than accurate
technical info, that's your loss. Am I supposed to feel bad about it
or something?

sherm--

 

[Sherm Pendley]

Do us a favour Jack, stick mine in there too. We'll have a party.

W00t! I'll bring the Guinness, and then we can argue with the Bud
drinkers about what the word "beer" really means.

sherm--

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

W00t! I'll bring the Guinness, and then we can argue with the Bud
drinkers about what the word "beer" really means.

Guinness vs Bud? Com 'on! Except for washing grease off of engine parts
who would actually drink a Bud?

 

[Blinky the Shark]

Guinness vs Bud? Com 'on! Except for washing grease off of engine parts
who would actually drink a Bud?

I would.

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

I would.

Well if I downed as much seawater, squid, and fisherman's boots I guess
I would too!

 

[dorayme]

Sherm

I don't know what your problem is with Albert and I don't care.
Your name is going to the same place Guy put mine. In the kill file.

That's very unfair. By the grace of god some people have not kf'd you in
spite of your annoying habit of top posting. Look, Jack, I am going to
level with you. I have come to earth to be kf'd just as Christ did to
absorb man's guilt onto His shoulders. So don't do this to Sherm, he is
not good in kfs, he suffers needlessly. Please, please take me.

 

[Nico Schuyt]

Albert Wiersch

Well if _I_ remember correctly the issue was that CSE reported an
unclosed <dt> or <dl> as an error (the closing tag is optional).

That's what I would expect a validator to do

An acceptable (to me) definition of 'validation' is: Determination of the
correctness of the products of software
development with respect to the user needs and requirements.
It seems to me that's exactly what CSE does.

 

[dorayme]

Guinness vs Bud? Com 'on! Except for washing grease off of engine parts
who would actually drink a Bud?

<http://members.optushome.com.au/hewajama/films/budLight.mpg>

 

[Peter J Ross]

In alt.html on Sun, 24 Aug 2008 20:33:51 -0500, Albert Wiersch

Probably referring to me, the developer of CSE HTML Validator.

Is there a version for Linux available?

If not, why not?

 

[dorayme]

It seems some non-standard markup is recommended in this forum when there is
no standard way... do all those people get bashed? Hope not.

This is the House of Bashing. It is a darkly lit alley where the
unsuspecting are mugged, where novicide is committed. It is a microcosm
of the world's injustice. It exists to mirror and indulge in everything
that is wrong and childish. It is a clearing house, a purgatory that
administers the road to the killfile. It is a place where people are
accused of dishonesty, plagiarism, drug taking, of insanity. It is the
seat of the silent treatment. I would not miss it for a universe.

 

[Sherm Pendley]

That's what I would expect a validator to do

That's because you don't know what a validator is. If you *did* know,
you wouldn't expect that. According to the DTD, those closing tags are
not required, so a validator, by definition, would not report their
absence as an error.

On the other hand, I *would* expect a lint checker to flag it, because
it's a good idea to include the closing tags whether they're required
by the DTD or not.

sherm--

 

[Tim Streater]

Guinness vs Bud? Com 'on! Except for washing grease off of engine parts
who would actually drink a Bud?

So Bud really *is* detergent? Just what I always thought.

 

[Sherm Pendley]

So Bud really *is* detergent? Just what I always thought.

You know, if it actually tasted like beer, they wouldn't need
commercials telling us "this is beer" - we could figure it out for our
selves.

sherm--