On 13/03/06, Gunlaug Sørtun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > So currently it makes sense for CSS 2 to be the default profile.
> Not so sure about that, as "support by browsers" is no good if designers > are thrown off by being told "it isn't valid". OTOH is it such a good idea to encourage the use of new features which aren't yet stable in the spec? > Not that I see a big problem in the way it is handled now, but such > "not yet standard" should have been handled a little more > designer-friendly - by adding an informative message to the > 'error', or something. I haven't poked around the internals of the validator, but I suspect that testing each property/value combination that isn't valid under the selected profile to see if it is valid under another might be a bit tricky. That said the language of the output could certainly be improved, and I think it would benefit from a UI more like the Markup Validator (giving the option to revalidate with different options, thus drawing attention to the version being tested against). It is an open source project, so anybody can offer a patch. http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/DOWNLOAD.html > Wouldn't have to use css-d to inform people about how the validator works > then. If only users would read the manual for software they use ... :) -- David Dorward <http://dorward.me.uk><http://blog.dorward.me.uk> ______________________________________________________________________ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d IE7b2 testing hub -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=IE7 List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
