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

Re: Beta: Doctype override and valid documents

From: Terje Bless <link@pobox.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 03:21:18 +0200
To: W3C Validator <www-validator@w3.org>
cc: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Message-ID: <a01060005-1021-1087398AE7B811D6AC5400039300CF5C@[193.157.66.10]>

Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net> wrote:

>The "would validate" note is very well hidden after the super obtrusive
>"Tip of the day" and the "doctype override" note. The result is the most
>important information on the page, but you have hard times to find it at
>all.

Any suggestions for how we could improve this?


>Second, yes, the page would validate es XHTML 1.0 Strict, but who cares
>about that? It has a XHTML 1.0 Transitional document type declaration
>and I selected "override" to XHTML 1.0 Transitional, so what? Last but
>not least, I don't need to update the page, it validates. If selected
>document type and the document type given in the document match, the
>validator should not shout at me.

Hmmm. It complains because the option is labelled as "Doctype Override" not
"Selected Doctype". Perhaps we should check for this case and supress the
warning. The problem is that we've actually altered the document before
Validation. The original DOCTYPE declaration has been commented out and
we've inserted a new one matching the one you chose from the popup menu.
We'd need to detect this case very early and also skip the Doctype supress
step. This is rather tricky to do though.

This has been assigned issue number #4, but I'm not sure when we'll be able
to do anything about it. It won't be in the next beta version and odds are
we won't be able to deal with it for the final release either.

-- 
"You gonna take advice from somebody who slapped DEE BARNES?!" -- eminem
Received on Thursday, 24 October 2002 21:21:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 25 April 2012 12:14:04 GMT