[whatwg] text/html flavor conformance checkers and <foo />
hsivonen at iki.fi
Wed Apr 27 02:42:31 PDT 2005
On Apr 27, 2005, at 04:13, fantasai wrote:
> Henri Sivonen wrote:
>> On Apr 26, 2005, at 19:08, fantasai wrote:
>>> Henri Sivonen wrote:
>>>> What do you suggest the parser layer of an text/html conformance
>>>> checker say about <input checkbox ...>?
>>>> 1. Silently treat as <input type="checkbox" ...>?
>>>> 2. Treat as <input type="checkbox" ...> but warn?
>>>> 3. Treat as <input checkbox="checkbox" ...> causing an error to be
>>>> reported on a higher layer?
>>>> 4. Treat as fatal error in the parser?
>>>> I'm inclined to choose 3.
>>> *Why?* Why of all things would you choose to interpret it like
>>> It's neither reporting a useful error, nor handling it per SGML
>> To make the separation of concerns similar to what it would be on the
>> XML side while being real about SGMLness being fiction. That is, the
>> parser does not need to know if an attribute is allowed. That's a job
>> for a higher layer.
> I still don't understand how this interpretation is useful or required.
It is useful, because it doesn't require knowledge of allowable
minimizable attributes on the lowest parser level.
> If you want to make <input checkbox> invalid, handle it the same way
> you'd handle <input foo>.
That's what I am suggesting. The parser would treat <input foo> as
<input foo="foo">, which would be caught on the RELAX NG validation
layer in my diagram.
> Expanding the attribute from checked to checked="checked" is neither
> conforming to SGML parsing rules
ITYM checkbox to checkbox="checkbox".
> nor helping the author understand what was wrong.
Would "Attribute 'checkbox' not allowed here." or something along those
lines be any more incomprehensible that validation errors in general?
> I mean, I understand you're disillusioned with the state of HTML
> parsing in the world, but it doesn't mean you need to be /reactionary/
> about it.
Authors get constantly confused when validator.w3.org feeds them SGML
fiction. Why shouldn't the QA tools be better aligned with reality?
hsivonen at iki.fi
More information about the whatwg