On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 23:14:10 -0500, DFS wrote:
> Today's markup validation results (compared to errors Feb 2007 and Sep
> 2006)
>
> http://validator.w3.org/
>
> www.linuxsecurity.com/ fails w/ 424 errors (356, 356) www.redhat.com
> fails w/ 3 errors (15, 18) www.kernel.org passed validation (passed,
> passed) www.ubuntu.com fails w/ 84 errors (20, 23) www.osdl.org fails w/
> 10 errors (passed, 38) www.distrowatch.com fails w/ 1566 errors (940,
> 928)
>
> www.microsoft.com fails w/ 32 errors (24, 2)
>
>
> New tests
> www.gnu.org passed validation
> www.fsf.org fails w/ 11 errors
> www.slated.org/ ([H]omer The [H]ypocrite's site) failed w/ 29 errors
> www.schestowitz.com (lying spamming idiot's site) passed w/ 2 warnings
> www.websterscafe.com (Handover Phist's site) failed w/ 30 errors
> www.open4success.org (Rex Ballard's site) failed w/ 146 errors
> www.linetec.nl (Richard Rasker's site) failed w/ 22 errors
> www.glaci.com (Thad's site) failed w/ 3 errors
>
> There you have it - whines about MS breaking standards, but Linux bozos
> aren't taking care of their own bizness...
Now, tell us what errors those are...
... and show us your sites error rate.
--
Rick
|
|
