W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > September 2007

Re: XHTML 1.1 validation accepts additional content

From: Rui del-Negro <w3validator@dvd-hq.info>
Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2007 22:51:52 +0100
To: www-validator@w3.org
Cc: ot@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.tx5gcqtijf0k3w@bigbang>

> On Tue, 04 Sep 2007 02:23:57 +0100, olivier Thereaux <ot@w3.org> wrote:
>
> Well, at least as far as I can tell there is no way to "inject" a link,  
> just some text, and yes, that text can be as stupid as humanity allows  
> it, that is, infinitely.
>
> I'm not sure what to do with your "bug" report here. It feels as though  
> its use will be mostly to give bad ideas to idiots, and as far as  
> "fixing" the validator is concerned, I'm not sure what to do. Maybe we  
> could limit the length of the string that is displayed...
>
> Any idea from everyone on the list?

I don't think that the kind of people likely to recognise "W3C" as a  
"source of authority" will fall for this kind of trick.

Having said that, maybe the header that says:

  This page is not valid [X].

Could say:

  This page does not validate (using doctype "[X]").

Or something along those lines. In other words, avoid making the doctype  
appear as part of the sentence.

RMN
~~~
Received on Tuesday, 4 September 2007 21:52:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 10 December 2014 20:08:59 UTC