On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Jonathan Rees <[email protected]> wrote: > Tools like this are more useful when they provide not just some > judgment but also the justification, in terms of what was found and > what is specified, for any particular judgment. (The W3C HTML > validator does this really well.) This is especially important when > there are that standards status of much of this practice is so > peculiar. If you're going to be transparent and accountable you will > need to expose a more detailed and nuanced story.
My apologies for the way I said this! You do this really well already - the only thing I'd add is references to specs, notes, emails, or whatever other justifications you're using. Jonathan
