CSE HTML Validator?

[Mason A. Clark]

is it any good?

[Michael Wilcox]

Mason A. Clark <ma*******@THISix.netcom.comQ> wrote:

is it any good?

Are you actually considering paying for a validator when there's already two
(three if you count the W3C beta one) free validators out there?
--
Michael Wilcox
mjwilco at yahoo dot com
Essential Tools for the Web Developer - http://mikewilcox.t35.com

[DU]

Mason A. Clark wrote:

is it any good?

CSE HTML validator is not a true validator to begin with.

I recommend to use the W3C validator or the WDG validator online: these
are free validators and true, genuine validators.
Best is to use Checky 2.0 along with Mozilla 1.6: it's 40+ different
kinds of validators.
http://checky.mozdev.org/index.html

Opera 7.x has the W3-dev menu 1.1 with all kinds of quick shortcuts to
validator engines, webpages. Do a search on Toby A. Inkster on this.

DU

[Mason A. Clark]

On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 02:19:19 GMT, "Michael Wilcox" begged the question.

Mason A. Clark <ma*******@THISix.netcom.comQ> wrote:

is it any good?

Are you actually considering paying for a validator when there's already two
(three if you count the W3C beta one) free validators out there?

I assume this is a slow way of typing "I don't know."

[Mason A. Clark]

On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 22:08:40 -0500, DU wrote:

Mason A. Clark wrote:

is it any good?
CSE HTML validator is not a true validator to begin with.

That's helpful to know. What the hell does it mean?
I recommend to use the W3C validator or the WDG validator online: these
are free validators and true, genuine validators.
Best is to use Checky 2.0 along with Mozilla 1.6: it's 40+ different
kinds of validators. http://checky.mozdev.org/index.html

Opera 7.x has the W3-dev menu 1.1 with all kinds of quick shortcuts to
validator engines, webpages. Do a search on Toby A. Inkster on this.

DU

[Jukka K. Korpela]

Mason A. Clark <ma*******@THISix.netcom.comQ> wrote:

CSE HTML validator is not a true validator to begin with.

That's helpful to know. What the hell does it mean?

It's snake oil. But try checking the previous discussions using Google
Groups - without restricting search to this group, since HTML
validation is not a stylesheets issue. Then if issues remain, please
raise them in a more adequate group.

(It's not a validator, period. They sell it as one, despite the fact
that this has been pointed out many times. This should ring a bell.)

--
Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/

[Alan J. Flavell]

On Sun, 22 Feb 2004, Michael Wilcox wrote:

Mason A. Clark <ma*******@THISix.netcom.comQ> wrote:

is it any good?
Are you actually considering paying for a validator

If you are, then you'll be cheated. In SGML/XML contexts, the term
"validation" has a precise formal meaning - and this product, whatever
else it might do, doesn't perform validation in that sense.
when there's already two
(three if you count the W3C beta one) free validators out there?

These are indeed basically formal validators, if one overlooks one or
two wrinkles which deal with the difference between HTML and XHTML,
and a small number of useful warnings that aren't, strictly speaking,
part of formal validation.

None of this has anything to do with stylesheets, however. xpost and
f'up.

[Michael Wilcox]

Mason A. Clark <ma*******@THISix.netcom.comQ> wrote:

I assume this is a slow way of typing "I don't know."

More like, "I don't want to know."
--
Michael Wilcox
mjwilco at yahoo dot com
Essential Tools for the Web Developer - http://mikewilcox.t35.com

[Mason A. Clark]

On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 02:15:59 GMT, Mason A. Clark <ma*******@THISix.netcom.comQ>
wrote:

is it any good?

ok ok ok..... thanks for the responses (really) .... i was just wondering....