Peter Bradley wrote:
> Ar 12/05/10 21:10, ysgrifennodd John :
>
>> I haven't been able to get a page validated all week...others seeing
>> this too?
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Short, sporadic time-outs on this end. It's the weather. Or is it the
moon? Either way, Tidy Online is often very hel
On May 13, 2010, at 6:26 AM, jeffrey morin wrote:
> I would say it's a good idea to validate your CSS if only to check that you
> haven't made any typos. I know that when I check legacy code I have found
> some obvious things that could have been avoided by using the validator. But
> I would say
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 5:23 PM, Gabriele Romanato <
gabriele.roman...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Honestly speaking guys, I don't see the point with using the W3C CSS
> Validator today. If you need parsing check, it's already performed by
> most browsers. If you need version checking, simply stick to eac
Honestly speaking guys, I don't see the point with using the W3C CSS
Validator today. If you need parsing check, it's already performed by
most browsers. If you need version checking, simply stick to each
style definition explained in the specs. For example, simply add
&profile=cssn to your
Ar 12/05/10 21:10, ysgrifennodd John :
> I haven't been able to get a page validated all week...others seeing
> this too?
>
>
It's been very slow for a while now. It does work in the end, if you
can stand the wait.
Chers
Peter
--
http://www.peredur.net
_
I haven't been able to get a page validated all week...others seeing
this too?
Is there an alternative?
thanks,
John
__
css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ
