At this point in time (all?) validators generate errors for "bad" stuff as well as really "good" stuff because most validators are very out of date.
As Jonathan pointed out right now Google shows about 40 errors. Running www.Web2py.com shows about 14 errors at http://validator.w3.org/ I don't think I recall anyone mentioning validation as an issue with Web2py with the exception of myself and that was in regard to potential validation errors that might be generated by incorporating perfectly valid WAI-ARIA roles / landmarks into Web2py applications. My preference would be to incorporate what works best for everyone then to be overly concerned with validation issues, especially those related to valid code and out of date validators. If anyone is interested this is a link to a validator for OS X that can be customized. Validator S.A.C. (Stand Alone Complex) is a stand-alone, easy to install, version of the W3C's HTML / XHTML Markup Validator for Mac OS X: http://habilis.net/validator-sac/ Here is an example of a customized version that has been made to support w3 WAI-ARIA features: http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/?p=108 Does any one know of any Python based validators that are available? In closing, validation errors help point out where we have problems but they will also points out where we are "ahead of the game" using perfectly valid code that fails because no up to date validator is are available that suports all w3 standards. Personally and professionally validation errors don't bother me a whole lot and all though I have heard rumors of companies that insist on code that validates 100%, I have yet to run into any myself. Cheers, Chris Christopher Steel On 12 avr, 13:36, mdipierro <mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu> wrote: > good point > > On Apr 12, 12:33 pm, Jonathan Lundell <jlund...@pobox.com> wrote:> On Apr 12, > 2010, at 10:23 AM, mdipierro wrote: > > > > ps. I am not suggesting we use the new html5 features yet (like > > > forms). Only the doctype (google does it) and make sure it w3c > > > validates. > > > I'm not sure that Google is the best example to > > follow:http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.google.com > > > > On Apr 12, 12:10 pm, Jonathan Lundell <jlund...@pobox.com> wrote: > > >> On Apr 12, 2010, at 9:59 AM, mdipierro wrote: > > > >>> should we replace in welcome > > > >>> <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http:// > > >>>www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> > > > >>> with > > > >>> <!DOCTYPE html> > > > >>> pros? cons? > > > >> HTML5 is still a draft, not a standard. Validation tools tend not to > > >> support it (BBEdit is a case in point). > > > > -- > > > To unsubscribe, reply using "remove me" as the subject.
