W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator-cvs@w3.org > July 2013

[Bug 22741] validator.w3.org does not give an option to validate HTML+RDFa

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2013 16:49:52 +0000
To: www-validator-cvs@w3.org
Message-ID: <bug-22741-169-Y2jsVDdp77@http.www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/>
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22741

Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |msporny@digitalbazaar.com

--- Comment #4 from Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com> ---
Additionally, I keep getting comments from people that claim that the W3C
Validator is broken because their RDFa markup doesn't validate. In many cases,
their markup is valid, but since the validator uses RDFa Lite 1.1 by default,
it makes it seem like their markup is broken when it isn't.

There are a few solutions that I can think of to this problem:

Make RDFa 1.1 the default, and if the document validates as RDFa 1.1, put a
button on the page that states that they can click to also validate the
document as RDFa 1.1 Lite.

Keep RDFa Lite 1.1 as the default, but if the validation fails, try RDFa 1.1
and if it succeeds, make a note of it passing as RDFa 1.1. Maybe say that the
document failed as RDFa Lite 1.1, but passes as regular RDFa 1.1 and show the
normal success page.

I'm starting to think that this as a pretty bad usability issue with the
validator. Putting aside the computing resources necessary to run the validator
multiple times, given the target audience, the validator should just "do the
right thing" in these instances where there is a clear algorithm for checking
to see if the document is valid or not.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Sunday, 21 July 2013 16:49:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:17:55 UTC