W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > April 2005

[whatwg] [html5] tags, elements and generated DOM

From: Anne van Kesteren <fora@annevankesteren.nl>
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 14:48:19 +0200
Message-ID: <4253DA93.8030606@annevankesteren.nl>
Lachlan Hunt wrote:
>>>>> Validators should not be non-conformant simply because they 
>>>>> only do their job to validate a document and nothing else.  I
>>>>> don't see any reason why such a statement needs to be 
>>>>> included at all.
>> 
>> I don't see anything about validators. I only read about 
>> "Conformance checkers".
> 
> In the note in that section [1]:
> 
> | Conformance checkers that only perform validation are 
> non-conformant,

So? That doesn't make it a validator. A conformance checker might do
things validators do too, but that doesn't make it one.


> In fact, now that I've read it again, it seems rather contradictory.

How?


> I would argue that conformance requirements that cannot be expressed 
> by a DTD *are* constraints that require interpretation by the author.

Not really. Think about:
  <http://annevankesteren.nl/archives/2003/09/invalid-after-validated>


> Therefore, that section seems to be saying that validators are exempt
> from checking some things, but are non-conformant for not checking 
> them anyway.

Note that this is about more than just validating and isn't about
validators.


-- 
  Anne van Kesteren
  <http://annevankesteren.nl/>
Received on Wednesday, 6 April 2005 05:48:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:08:22 UTC