W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-bugzilla@w3.org > October 2010

[Bug 11064] unstated requirement to be valid.

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2010 16:15:19 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1P6mwB-0006lG-5a@jessica.w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11064

--- Comment #4 from David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk> 2010-10-15 16:15:18 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
clearly as I'd like) either.
> 
> An HTML5 polyglot document is still an HTML5 document.  This specification does
> not purport to change conformance requirements; indeed, the specification is
> entirely non-normative.
> 
> Thus, the requirements imposed by the HTML5 spec still apply.

yes but which requirements? HTML5 (as you know:-) specifies a parse tree for
any input, not just valid input. This spec purports to say that if you follow
the advice here then you will get the same DOM in text/html and xml, which
clearly isn't the case for non valid input. It wouldn't hurt to say that there
is an assumption that the input is valid.

then even if it is valid it may make (say) a lot of use of implied end tags,
and if it does that you won't get the same DOM (or any DOM at all) from an XML
parser, but this spec does not tell you that. So there is an apparent
assumption that this specification is discussing valid html5 documents that are
(at least) well formed XML, and then giving the further requirements needed to
get compatible DOM. But if the input is assumed well formed, why give
requirements such as uppercase <!DOCTYPE or quotes around attribute values?

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Friday, 15 October 2010 16:15:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 16:30:59 UTC