I find that once I have the site chrome (structural features) valid then I don't really care too much about small errors that don't impact the appearance. When you've got code dragged in, with javascript calls, that doesn't validate anyway (Google, etc.) ...
These things always give millions of entity errors (other people dictate the URLs used) perhaps an intial view that just says which errors are on a page (broad categories) - entity errors, failed to close a tab, incorrect attributes, etc.. with drill down to the error details.
These details in the summary would be good too, as would the number of clean pages.
The reason that both validators are consulted is because they can pick-up different errors. The WDG validator is _much_ more reliable when it comes to finding unicode issues and that has saved my ass at least once.
Your other thoughts are things I'll keep an eye on when I do the re-write.
I find that once I have the site chrome (structural features) valid then I don't really care too much about small errors that don't impact the appearance. When you've got code dragged in, with javascript calls, that doesn't validate anyway (Google, etc.) ...
These things always give millions of entity errors (other people dictate the URLs used) perhaps an intial view that just says which errors are on a page (broad categories) - entity errors, failed to close a tab, incorrect attributes, etc.. with drill down to the error details.
These details in the summary would be good too, as would the number of clean pages.
I don't like the dark theme.