Re: CSS software tools sought

Scripsit Albert Wiersch:


Well, if you'd take a look at the example of the problems listed here:
http://www.htmlvalidator.com/htmlval/whycseisbetter.html

then I think you would find out that it does more than generate errors
because it doesn't like the color one has chosen.

You're right: it also gives seriously misleading "error" messages that make people waste their time.

For example, claiming <title>Untitled</title> to be an error is really foolish - there's is infinite number of stupid title elements that people use, and you pick up one of them and present this as great benefit. And there's nothing wrong with using <title>Untitled</title> if you like to use it in your document and know what you are doing. Not all HTML documents are web pages, and not all web pages are serious.

Then you have "Missing meta description tag used by some search engines". That was cool (though misguided) in about 1997 or so. Most authors know better these days than waste their time writing meta descriptions, but your fake error messages try to return them into such futility.

Those were your first examples. If that's what you do with HTML, I really don't want to know what "error messages" your product issues about style sheets.

(Oh I peeked... it claims that "ariel" is not a font name. That's foolish. Anyone can design a font and give it that name. I wouldn't be surprised if someone had done so. Calling it an error is simply wrong.)

--
Jukka K. Korpela ("Yucca")
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/

.