Next message: Nick Kew: "Re: Warn about unknown parameters"
From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
To: Terje Bless <link@pobox.com>
Cc: W3C Validator <www-validator@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2001 04:55:47 +0200
Message-ID: <meremtoapjdatcsjeltovagr67ga2uj9s4@4ax.com>
Subject: Re: Warn about unknown parameters
* Terje Bless wrote:
>>>>In our german web authoring newsgroup Thomas Mager just wondered why
>>>>http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.art-emilio.de/galerie.shtml?Acryl;1
>Yeah, I'm kinda with you so far, but how does that change whether or not
>the page is Valid?
http://www.art-emilio.de/galerie.shtml?Acryl;1 valid
http://www.art-emilio.de/galerie.shtml?Acryl invalid.
User wants to validate the first one but the Validator retrieves and
validates the latter.
>We ignore unknown parameters completely
Yes, that's what I am complaining about. Unknown parameters should get
reported to avoid confusion.
>Waitaminute...
*argl*! :-)
>We end up requesting a different page and that page happens
>to be invalid? So the extra params aren't affecting _our_ behaviour, it's
>the _lack_ of params that makes the _validated_ server change _it's_
>«behaviour»? IOW, it's not an error in the Validator -- the error lies with
>the user failing to escape CGI params -- it's just that it would be a
>usefull feature to actually give a warning about it to make the user aware
>that s/he needs to escape these characters?
We can harldy do that. Complain about invalid parameters is fair enough.
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3b70e0ab.6398430%40news.bjoern.hoehrmann.de
--
Björn Höhrmann { mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de } http://www.bjoernsworld.de
am Badedeich 7 } Telefon: +49(0)4667/981028 { http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
25899 Dagebüll { PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 } http://www.learn.to/quote/