W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > December 2006

[whatwg] several messages about XML syntax and HTML5

From: Mike Schinkel <mikeschinkel@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2006 18:09:44 -0500
Message-ID: <02f101c7198b$9fd95f00$0702a8c0@Guides.local>
Ian Hickson:
>> Validators are allowed to give any warnings or notes 
>> they like. (The spec only specifies that a validator 
>> must give no errors if there are no errors and must 
>> give at least one error if there are any, IIRC.) 

Is it possible for the spec to suggest/recommend that validators present
warnings in certain circumstances, i.e. in the case of meaningless markup
that is nonetheless allowed?

>> > 	"Implementors SHOULD NOT use string concatonation and 
>> > 	SHOULD use one of the HTML5 components listed here: 
>> > 	http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Implementations" 
>> It is not the job of specifications to limit implementation strategies.

Which part of my suggestion did you find limiting: a.) "SHOULD NOT use
string concatonation", b.) "SHOULD use one of the HTML5 components listed
here:", or c.) both?

My *intention* for the wording was to give guidance to implementors such
that they avoid all the Bad Things(tm) that you and others rant about, and
that they are both "made aware of" and "given permission to use" HTML
components instead of string concatonation. I'm sure if I can understand
your objections with the effect of my wording I can come up with acceptable
wording to achieve the same ends.

-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org/
Received on Wednesday, 6 December 2006 15:09:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:08:31 UTC