W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > April 2002

Re: attributes with missing values yield different errors?

From: Liam Quinn <liam@htmlhelp.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2002 16:26:43 -0500 (EST)
To: Jim Correia <correia@barebones.com>
cc: W3C Validator <www-validator@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33L2.0204041621140.32497-100000@localhost.localdomain>
On Thu, 4 Apr 2002, Jim Correia wrote:

> On Thursday, April 4, 2002, at 04:12  PM, Liam Quinn wrote:
>
> > No.  <table border> is actually equivalent to <table frame=border>.
> > Note
> > this comment from the HTML 4.01 DTD in describing the values for the
> > "frame" attribute:
> >
> >  The value "border" is included for backwards compatibility with
> >  <TABLE BORDER> which yields frame=border and border=implied
> >  For <TABLE BORDER=1> you get border=1 and frame=implied. In this
> >  case, it is appropriate to treat this as frame=border for backwards
> >  compatibility with deployed browsers.
>
> That is what the prose of the specification says. What I am trying to
> understand is how the DTD knows this, and doesn't complain?

It's SGML attribute minimization: just as you can use <p center> in place
of <p align=center>, you can use <table border> in place of <table
frame=border>.

> Is the other obtuse error it reports for
>
> <table summary>
>
> actually just trying to tell me I should have supplied a value?

It's saying that there is no attribute value (for minimization) named
"summary".

-- 
Liam Quinn
Received on Thursday, 4 April 2002 16:26:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 25 April 2012 12:14:03 GMT