[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
Thanks, Ben, for pointing out www.totalvalidator.com (TV). It looks a useful alternative to validator.w3.org but doesn't appear to check CSS, which w3c's service can do. A nice feature is that when the HTML is /bad/, TV prettyprints the text interspersed with its error-findings. This chopped efficiently through some thickets produced by Nightmareweaver! On further thought I suppose it is merely an application of htmltidy, which I have on my own machine anyway. W3C allow you to install their validator on your machine. I found that a bit complicated, but that it was enough to fetch the appropriate DTD, and use it with nsgmls (which I had anyway). As I sometimes update dozens of pages at once, that breaks a tight bottleneck. Even for single files it saves a lot of time. IIRC, W3C say there is /no/ mechanical test that shows that a page satisfies Web Accessibility Initiative at any of the three levels, so while I believe TV's tests must be useful, I wonder whether they can be sufficient. regards John -- John Palmer Preston near Weymouth, Dorset, England e-mail: johnp@xxxxxxxxxx (plain text preferred) website: http://www.palmyra.uklinux.net/ -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html