[whatwg] [html5] tags, elements and generated DOM
lachlan.hunt at lachy.id.au
Thu Apr 7 23:23:31 PDT 2005
Henri Sivonen wrote:
> On Apr 7, 2005, at 09:58, Lachlan Hunt wrote:
>> There's no reason why a full conformance checker couldn't be based on
> It would be prudent not to use OpenSP in order to avoid accidentally
> allowing SGMLisms that are alien to real-world tag soup.
If I ever get around to writing any form of conformance checker, true
SGML validation (most likely using OpenSP) or XML validation (probably
using Xerces or other XML parser) is at the top of my list.
Personally, I probably wouldn't make use of a full conformance checker
too often during my normal publishing process, as I understand semantic
documents and most likely wouldn't end up writing non-conformant
documents in that regard anyway. However, I do make mistakes and forget
to close elements, misspell attributes and tag-names or whatever, in
which case an SGML validator catches most of those mistakes for me.
Yes, I know there are some things like conditionally required attributes
that cannot be expressed by a DTD, but that doesn't make _true SGML or
XML_ validation any less of a *very useful conformance tool*.
>> Infact, it would probably be a good idea for them to do so, since then
>> they'll also be real validators too, which is part of the conformance
> I don't think SGML validation is part of What WG conformance
Considering it seems to be part of the conformance criteria,
| Conformance checkers *must* verify that a document conforms to the
| applicable conformance criteria described in this specification...
| The term "validation" specifically refers to a subset of conformance
| 1. Criteria that can be expressed in a DTD.
validation is a critical part of conformance checking.
> I thought Hixie has specifically said he doesn't bother with DTDs.
Just because his authoring practices may not involve their use, doesn't
mean many other authors don't make use of them.
As real usecase for DTD validation, consider this. There are increasing
calls for CMSs to produce strictly conformant markup. There have been
many complaints that such conformance is not enforced, which results in
many invalid and non-conformant websites. Users should not be required
to check all of these conformance criteria manually before submitting
content through a CMS, as experience shows that simply doesn't happen.
If CMSs are ever going to enforce strinctly conformant code, then DTD
validation will be a core component of that process. Why re-invent the
wheel when it comes to that, when a perfectly suitable and proven method
already exists? Experience has shown, with all the lints available,
that validation/conformance checking without a DTD is often incorrect,
which makes them very useless conformance tools.
This is why HTML must remain an application of SGML, the XHTML version
*must* be a *valid* application of XML, and why DTDs are so important.
The only thing we are waiting for in this field is CMSs that actually do
enforce conformance, which we won't have a chance with if DTDs (or
Schemas for XML) are not retained.
http://GetFirefox.com/ Rediscover the Web
http://GetThunderbird.com/ Reclaim your Inbox
More information about the whatwg