[whatwg] Re: Doctype FPI
tbray at textuality.com
Wed Jul 14 09:32:43 PDT 2004
On Jul 14, 2004, at 1:24 AM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> Yes. People rely on DTDs in a way which has led to millions of authors
> have a false sense of having done the right thing, when in fact their
> documents are sometimes worse than documents that are syntactically
> slightly broken but semantically fine.
Agreed, but as a Web Designer who is almost never smart enough to get a
page design right first time, and who thus spends time crawling down
CSS rat-holes, I have to say that the online HTML and CSS validators
are incredibly useful at helping me find my more obvious bugs, and thus
are huge time-savers. Nobody claims that having validated successfully
really proves anything of much use, but precise indications of how &
where you're *not* valid are incredibly useful.
Thus I think the work of the WHAT-WG would be substantially more useful
to the community if it were accompanied by some sort of validator that
would help people like me deal with the consequences of our own
I agree with someone else who suggested that Relax-NG/Schematron would
be the sensible way to go about constructing such a thing. I would
further point out that the RelaxNG community is full of people in
evangelism mode who might be inclined to pitch in and help if asked.
- Tim Bray, Director of Web Technologies, Sun Microsystems
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 2369 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the whatwg