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

Re: Todo list (was: sgml-lib/REC-xhtml1-20000126/xhtml1-transitional.dtd)

From: Bertilo Wennergren <bertilow@gmx.net>
Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 13:50:03 +0100
To: W3C Validator <www-validator@w3.org>
Message-Id: <200212011350.04026.bertilow@gmx.net>

Terje Bless:

> >- My favourite browser is Netscape 3, therefore the internal
> >  links don't work (missing <a name=...> for all id=...).  All
> >  styles are of course silently ignored (incl. class="none").

> The links will probably not work in Netscape 4.x either (at least it
> used to have problems with anything but <a name=""></a>), but that
> doesn't really worry me greatly. There are limits to how broken a
> browser can be before I stop jumping through hoops for it; and
> Netscape 4.x has long since passed that limit. Sorry.

Hmmm... I hope I haven't misunderstood what this is about.

The validator's pages are in XHTML 1.0 Strict, and they are served as 
"text/html". The following two docs together state that for XHTML 1.0 
Strict to be served as "text/html" the compatibility guidelines in 
XHTML 1.0 should be used, and those guidelines include a recommendation 
to use both "name" and "id" in "a" anchors:

  XHTML Media Types
  <http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/NOTE-xhtml-media-types-20020430/>

  XHTML 1.0: The Extensible HyperText Markup Language
  <http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-xhtml1-20000126/>

So I really can't see that this would be jumping through hoops, or 
bending over backwards to cater for Netscape 4. It would just mean 
following the relevant docs and recommendations.

I know that the "XHTML Media Types" doc is just a Note, and that it is 
not really binding, but it does describe very recommendable and wise 
practices. It would be puzzling if the W3C validator would not pay 
close attention to that doc. And after all the compatibility guidelines 
themselves are in the XHTML 1.0 recommendation (from the first edition) 
and that alone ought to be mean that they be taken very seriously.

> It is unfortunate that this results in broken internal links for you
> of course, but we have to draw the line somewhere.

Indeed. But following the relevante recommendations and notes from the 
W3C would seem to fall well on the right side of that line.

-- 
Bertilo Wennergren <bertilow@gmx.net> <http://www.bertilow.com>
Received on Sunday, 1 December 2002 07:47:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 25 April 2012 12:14:05 GMT