W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > February 2008

Re: Validation error frequencies

From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2008 18:28:38 +0200
Cc: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
Message-Id: <C3960C76-134B-40C2-8637-C1C808C4E100@iki.fi>
To: Kornel Lesinski <kornel@geekhood.net>

On Feb 1, 2008, at 02:29, Kornel Lesinski wrote:

> On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 21:50:52 -0000, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>  
> wrote:
>
>> In the case of border, I think it would be good also to get rid of  
>> the default border in Gecko, since other browsers have been able to  
>> get rid of it without Breaking the Web.
>
> Instead of allowing border=0 on images I suggest making it  
> irrelevant by specifying that images should have no border by default.

We should do that *as well*, but even if HTML5 says that image links  
shouldn't have a border by default, people who offer copy-pasteable  
image embedding snippets will want to make their pieces of HTML self- 
contained so that they render without the border in the IE and Firefox  
as already shipped and installed. <img style='border: 0;'> is not an  
improvement over <img border='0'>.

Making images default to no border makes generating HTML simpler in  
the future. Making border='0' conforming makes it simpler to include  
pieces of markup from legacy tools and from people with old habits.

>>> 0052 / 400	Attribute name not allowed on element a from  
>>> namespace http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml at this point.
>>
>> Not dead with Netscape 4...
>
> But it's easy to fix.

Not necessarily if you've got legacy tools that are too costly for you  
to alter and those tools emit <a name='...'>.

>>> 0001 / 400	Element nobr from namespace http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml 
>>>  not allowed in this context. (The parent was element form from  
>>> namespace http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml.) Suppressing further  
>>> errors from this subtree.
>>> 0002 / 400	Element wbr from namespace http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml 
>>>  not allowed in this context. (The parent was element p from  
>>> namespace http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml.) Suppressing further  
>>> errors from this subtree.
>>> 0001 / 400	Element wbr from namespace http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml 
>>>  not allowed in this context. (The parent was element a from  
>>> namespace http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml.) Suppressing further  
>>> errors from this subtree.
>>
>> Let's make these conforming.
>
> I don't agree about nobr - it can be easily replaced with CSS.

<nobr> has been around forever and must continue to be supported by  
browsers. What's the harm in making it conforming, too?

> <wbr> might be allowed, given that alternatives aren't quite  
> interoperable yet (http://www.quirksmode.org/oddsandends/wbr.html),  
> but OTOH Gecko 1.9 finally supports soft hyphen, so soon <wbr> won't  
> be indispensable anymore.

Soft hyphen and <wbr> are different: soft hyphen renders a hyphen when  
breaking.

-- 
Henri Sivonen
hsivonen@iki.fi
http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Monday, 11 February 2008 16:28:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:38:52 UTC