- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 00:45:24 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Cc: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, public-html@w3.org, wai-xtech@w3.org
On Tue, 14 Jul 2009, Henri Sivonen wrote: > On Jul 8, 2009, at 11:26, Ian Hickson wrote: > > On Wed, 8 Jul 2009, Henri Sivonen wrote: > > > > > > I don't like downplayed errors. On one hand they want to be errors > > > but on the other, they are something that are designed to be easily > > > ignorable. I have dragged my feet with them hoping they'd go away. > > > One day I almost started implementing them but then I got a > > > higher-priority item to deal with. > > > > I've replaced downplayed errors with conforming features that trigger > > warnings. I've also taken the opportunity to trim the list of features > > that trigger this behaviour, so that we keep it to a minimum. > > I've implemented and deployed the normative warnings at > http://html5.validator.nu. > > However, I elected not to implement the following: > > For example, a validator could report some pages as "Valid HTML5" and > > others as "Valid HTML5 with warnings". > > I thought we agreed that we don't want multiple conformance classes. Multiple conformance classes is exactly what this is. I don't think it's a good idea, but it's what we have, if we require warnings, whether we say so or not. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Wednesday, 29 July 2009 00:46:03 UTC