W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator-cvs@w3.org > November 2015

[Bug 29298] New: URL fragment as #top should be okay even without explicitly-coded destination

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2015 04:12:25 +0000
To: www-validator-cvs@w3.org
Message-ID: <bug-29298-169@http.www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/>
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=29298

            Bug ID: 29298
           Summary: URL fragment as #top should be okay even without
                    explicitly-coded destination
           Product: Validator
           Version: HEAD
          Hardware: PC
               URL: http://cold32.com
                OS: Linux
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: check
          Assignee: dave.null@w3.org
          Reporter: Nick_Levinson@yahoo.com
        QA Contact: www-validator-cvs@w3.org
  Target Milestone: ---

The W3C Link Checker, when I allowed 10 levels of recursion (more than needed)
and set it to send the Referer, reported a link as broken because the URL
included the fragment identifier <#top>. I fixed those allegedly broken links
by adding id="top" to the body element but that shouldn't be necessary. Top is
an implicit destination and does not require an id or name attribute. See
HTML5, section 5.6.9, 2d series of steps, step 7 ("[i]f fragid ["the fragment
component of the resulting parsed URL"] is an ASCII case-insensitive match for
the string top, then the indicated part of the document is the top of the
document; stop the algorithm here") (insertion per id., step 1)
(http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/single-page.html#scroll-to-fragid). Therefore, the
Link Checker should accept the fragment identifier "#top" (without quotation
marks) as legitimate without an explicit destination as long as the part of the
URL to the left of the fragment identifier's hash mark is legitimate.

For this bug report, I guessed the component and the version; the version is
actually 4.81. The HTML5 text was as accessed last Sunday.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 17 November 2015 04:12:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 17 November 2015 04:12:31 UTC