[whatwg] [html5] tags, elements and generated DOM
Anne van Kesteren
fora at annevankesteren.nl
Wed Apr 6 05:48:19 PDT 2005
Lachlan Hunt wrote:
>>>>> Validators should not be non-conformant simply because they
>>>>> only do their job to validate a document and nothing else. I
>>>>> don't see any reason why such a statement needs to be
>>>>> included at all.
>>
>> I don't see anything about validators. I only read about
>> "Conformance checkers".
>
> In the note in that section [1]:
>
> | Conformance checkers that only perform validation are
> non-conformant,
So? That doesn't make it a validator. A conformance checker might do
things validators do too, but that doesn't make it one.
> In fact, now that I've read it again, it seems rather contradictory.
How?
> I would argue that conformance requirements that cannot be expressed
> by a DTD *are* constraints that require interpretation by the author.
Not really. Think about:
<http://annevankesteren.nl/archives/2003/09/invalid-after-validated>
> Therefore, that section seems to be saying that validators are exempt
> from checking some things, but are non-conformant for not checking
> them anyway.
Note that this is about more than just validating and isn't about
validators.
--
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>
More information about the whatwg
mailing list