W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > November 2000

RE: Attributes with no value

From: Dave J Woolley <david.woolley@bts.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2000 17:23:27 -0000
Message-ID: <81E4A2BC03CED111845100104B62AFB5824BBF@stagecoach.bts.co.uk>
To: www-html@w3.org
> From:	pdf@bizfon.com [SMTP:pdf@bizfon.com]
> What does it mean about "not a member of a group specified for any
> attribute"?
	SGML allows you to use the value of the equivalent of an
	enumerated type, without specifying the attribute name.
	The most common case of this is attributes of the form
	name="name", which are almost universally shortened to 
	name in HTML.

	[DJW:]  This is the declaration that allows readonly to
	be used without an "=" for INPUT elements:

	readonly (readonly) #IMPLIED -- for text and passwd --

	[DJW:]  The isolated keyword matches the one possible value in
	the parentheses,not the name that precedes it, they just
	happen, by design, to be the same.  #IMPLIED allows it to
	be omitted.
	[DJW:]  Basically, isolated words are values with no
	attribute name, not named attributes with no value.

> It seems to me that instead of being invalid, this should be considered as
> an
> attribute with no value (the same as alt="").  Is there some fundamental
> principle of HTML that I'm missing?  If not, then is it possible to modify
> the
	The fundamental principle it breaks is that HTML is 
	(an instance of) SGML.

> validator to see these as the same thing, therefore allowing my document
> to
> validate even after Microsoft has mutilated it?
	The purpose of the validator is to check validity, not 
	excuse commerical implemenation errors.

	In any case, the short cut of leaving out the parameter 
	name is illegal in XML, and therefore XHTML.  XML is
	the basis of all new standards.

I'm not sure about Interdev, but Front Page is well known
for making "HTML" with serious structural errors (FP 2000
may be better).

--------------------------- DISCLAIMER ---------------------------------
Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender,
except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of BTS.

Received on Thursday, 9 November 2000 12:23:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:05:55 UTC