W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > October 2012

Re: Anomaly that has been around since 2008/9

From: Jukka K. Korpela <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi>
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 13:00:33 +0300
Message-ID: <507698C1.70202@cs.tut.fi>
To: Paul de Freitas <paul@defreitas.info>
CC: www-validator@w3.org
2012-10-08 16:53, Paul de Freitas wrote:

> The following generates an error – note that onload does not generate an
> error:
> <body class="megasolV3" onload="fillTheScreen();
> Shadowbox.init(options); externalLinks()" onresize="fillTheScreen()">

The reason is that onload is defined in XHTML 1.0, onresize is not. 
Technically, what matters is the Document Type Definition used, in this 
case the one listed at

As the error explanation says:

> You have used the attribute named above in your document, but the
> document type you are using does not support that attribute for this
> element.

The onresize attribute is a Microsoft invention, now supported by most 
other browsers as well, but it isn't part of XHTML 1.0. It is being 
standardized in HTML5.

> Here is the URL of the document:
> http://www.megasol.se

The other validator error messages about it relate to features that are 
not valid in XHTML 1.0 but are valid in HTML5 (using <script> without 
type attribute and using data-* attributes). However, switching to an 
HTML5 doctype isn't that easy - contrary to popular misunderstandings, 
HTML5 is not a pure extension of HTML 4.01 and XHTML 1.0.

Something odd happens when I try to validate the page under HTML5, by 
just copying the source, pasting it into the textarea in "Validate by 
Direct Inpit" and then changing the doctype line to <!doctype HTML> 
before clicking on "Check". The fourth line, which is a comment, gets 
turned to

<!--<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" 
/><!-- <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; 
charset=iso-8859-1" /> -->-->

which really messes things up. I think this is bug in the validator.

Anyway, if I remove that comment (it plays little role anyway) and 
validate as HTML5, there's a single error. So maybe you wish to consider 
switching to an HTML5 doctype, despite the in-progress nature of HTML5 
and the experimental nature of HTML5 validation.

(The single error is about rel="shadowbox;width=960;height=610" in an 
<a> tag. It passes XHTML 1.0 validation, which treats rel attributes as 
taking any value, but not HTML5 validation, which uses a list of allowed 
rel attributes. This particular value does not look like one that should 
even be registered rel value. Rather, it looks like something you could 
put into a data-* attribute.)

Received on Thursday, 11 October 2012 10:01:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:31:10 UTC