Re^2: Wanted, more simple tutorials on testing

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Wanted, more simple tutorials on testing by adrianh (Chancellor) on Jul 24, 2005 at 11:14 UTC
Better than that, there's HTML-Tidy. It's basically the same as the w3c validator, While tidy is certainly a useful app it is nothing like the W3C validator. It doesn't do verification against doctypes, doesn't recognise use of meta tags to set character encoding, etc.	[reply]
Re^4: Wanted, more simple tutorials on testing by wazoox (Prior) on Jul 24, 2005 at 11:38 UTC
Hum, are we talking about the same app? Mine verify doctypes and even convert from a doctype to another (for instance from html 4.01 transitional to strict, or to xhtml 1.0 strict, etc). It also corrects character encodings IIRC.	[reply]
Re^5: Wanted, more simple tutorials on testing by adrianh (Chancellor) on Jul 24, 2005 at 15:56 UTC
Mine verify doctypes and even convert from a doctype to another (for instance from html 4.01 transitional to strict, or to xhtml 1.0 strict, etc). It also corrects character encodings IIRC. Tidy does some nice things, but it doesn't do the checks that the W3C validator does - it's not doing a full parse of the HTML based on the docs. For example the W3C Markup Validation Service will catch the error in this broken XHTML: `<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "DTD/xhtml1-s +trict.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> <head> <title>A random test file</title> </head> <body> <P>Oops - XHTML tags must be in lower case</p> </body> </html>` [download] but tidy thinks it's fine: `% tidy -e test.html Info: Doctype given is "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" Info: Document content looks like XHTML 1.0 Strict No warnings or errors were found. To learn more about HTML Tidy see http://tidy.sourceforge.net Please send bug reports to html-tidy@w3.org HTML and CSS specifications are available from http://www.w3.org/ Lobby your company to join W3C, see http://www.w3.org/Consortium` [download] I'm not saying tidy isn't useful. It's a great tool from basic checks and fixes on HTML. But it doesn't validate (X)HTML.	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^6: Wanted, more simple tutorials on testing by wazoox (Prior) on Jul 24, 2005 at 17:12 UTC
Re^7: Wanted, more simple tutorials on testing by adrianh (Chancellor) on Jul 25, 2005 at 10:19 UTC
Re^3: Wanted, more simple tutorials on testing by ww (Archbishop) on Jul 25, 2005 at 13:18 UTC
adrianh is completely correct; tidy (HTML) is an excellent tool for partial cleanup of bad (ie, non-w3c compliant) html and for pretty-fying code to make it easier to read when another author (or one of the less sensible WYSIWYG) has obfuscated the code... but it is NOT a validator.	[reply]


XP is just a number
	PerlMonks