W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > September 2005

Re: W3C Validator vs Schneegans

From: Christoph Schneegans <Christoph@Schneegans.de>
Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2005 15:28:09 GMT
To: <www-validator@w3.org>
Message-ID: <dfkjja.11g.1@mail.christoph.schneegans.de>

Terje Bless wrote:

>> Web browsers today are able to find (almost all) well-formedness
>> errors, the validator isn't!
>
> Please report these to Bugzilla (including test cases) if they aren't
> documented allready.

I think these reports are already there, e.g.:

. <http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12>
. <http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=68>
. <http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=1453>

> The Validator as it stands does have various limitations in its XML
> support. (...) The validator openly acknowledges these limitations,

Really? For example, where does it openly acknowledge that the
well-formedness violation in

  <p class=""title=""></p>

is not detected? (I've seen this kind of typo in XHTML documents more
than once.)

> While some of them may be fixable with the current parser, the plan
> for addressing these shortcomings long term is to make use of a
> specialized XML processor.

A specialized XML parser is the only reasonable choice for XML
documents. I think there's absolutely no sense in trying to make
OpenSP an XML parser.

> This requires some fairly big changes in the code - which is one
> reason why it's taking so long - and is not without its own issues
> (determining when to use the XML processor and when to use the SGML
> parser, for one).

When in doubt, let the user decide. <http://valet.webthing.com/page/>
offers two parsers.

-- 
<http://schneegans.de/>                                              |
Received on Tuesday, 6 September 2005 15:30:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 25 April 2012 12:14:20 GMT