Has the CSS validator (the W3C one) just become a whole lot more pedantic?
Sites that previously came out with a clean slate now throw up lots of
warnings.
I mean.. You'd expect sites made by people in the Features section of
the WSG site to be perfect. I checked a few of them at random. All
had warnings, some only a dozen or so, others had a long long list. Not
that I want to single anyone out, but one would have thought Westciv
would be OK. Or maxdesign. But no, even the W3C site gets a long list
of warnings.
Has the validator become too pedantic all of a sudden or was it too
lenient before? Should we ignore the warnings?
Regards
--
Bert Doorn, Better Web Design
http://www.betterwebdesign.com.au/
Fast-loading, user-friendly websites
******************************************************
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
******************************************************
