W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > March 2011

Re: <meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=edge;chrome=1">

From: Jukka K. Korpela <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi>
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 16:18:59 +0300
Message-ID: <374FCC4E0B5241E9AE505DCBC13F8CC3@JukanPC>
To: <www-validator@w3.org>
Cc: "Glynn Williams" <glynn@wowdesignsolutions.com>
Philip Taylor (Webmaster, Ret'd) wrote:

> Glynn Williams wrote:
>
>> This statement is valid, but shows non-valid for HTML5:
>>
>> <meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=edge;chrome=1">
>
> What are you using as the definition of "valid", Glynn ?

Apparently Glynn is worried about the report of the W3C Markup Validator. 
The validator is correct in this issue, as the current HTML5 drafts define a 
limited set of allowed values for http-equiv, not including the one needed 
here.

The tag is used to make IE behave the best it can, in "standards" mode, and 
if the author knows what he is doing (the page is designed to work in that 
mode), the tag is useful, due to IE 9's annoying features.

Validation is a tool, not an end, and there is no merit in getting a "clean" 
"validation" report from an experimental, poorly documented heuristic 
checker (which is what W3C Validator is in HTML5 mode), checking against an 
unknown version of some work in progess (which is what HTML5 is). It's a 
very useful tool if you wish to author in HTML5 style - but there's no point 
in trying to please it in matters like this.

-- 
Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/ 
Received on Tuesday, 29 March 2011 13:19:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 25 April 2012 12:14:46 GMT