[whatwg] Please make < inside tags a parse error
Ian Hickson
ian at hixie.ch
Thu Jun 21 21:41:34 PDT 2007
On Mon, 18 Jun 2007, Henri Sivonen wrote:
>
> The new treatment of < inside tags is
> * Potentially very confusing for authors
> * Different from previous de jure parsing
> * Different from what shipped Gecko and WebKit do.
>
> Therefore, please add an entry for < to tag name state, before attribute
> name state, attribute name state, after attribute name state and
> attribute value (unquoted) state:
>
> U+003C LESS-THAN SIGN (<)
> Parse error. Then treat according to the "Anything else" entry below.
On Mon, 18 Jun 2007, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>
> How is this character different from &, ", ', etc.? The element
> eventually created would be non-conforming anyway.
On Mon, 18 Jun 2007, Henri Sivonen wrote:
>
> Anne pointed out on IRC that I hadn't properly considered the tag name
> state, before attribute name state, attribute name state and after
> attribute name state being caught on a higher layer anyway.
I don't want to add too many parse errors, so yeah, I recommend we leave
it up to the higher-level layers here.
> In the case of attribute value (unquoted) state Gecko and WebKit already
> do what the spec says. It is highly confusing though.
It's only confusing to us because we know about SGML, I don't think most
people would be confused.
On Mon, 18 Jun 2007, Simon Pieters wrote:
>
> "<" in unquoted attribute values works interoperably. No need to make it
> a parse error in the attribute value (unquoted) state.
On Mon, 18 Jun 2007, Thomas Broyer wrote:
>
> This doesn't mean it should be conforming either (actually, it's
> entirely orthogonal). Parse errors are for conformance checkers, and I
> believe those should report "<" in unquoted attribute values as errors.
On Mon, 18 Jun 2007, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>
> Neh: <a title=2<5 href=http://www.whatwg.org/>WHATWG</a>. Maybe a
> warning at the discretion of conformance checkers.
On Mon, 18 Jun 2007, Henri Sivonen wrote:
>
> The source code looks like it parses to something different than it
> actually does. This makes typos harder to spot. I've made this a warning
> in my working copy.
I think a warning is fine. I'm not really convinced it should be
non-conforming though.
--
Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
More information about the whatwg
mailing list