W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > April 2014

Re: FW: REV attribute on A and LINK elements

From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2014 11:26:17 -0500
Message-ID: <CAOk_reFN+cDP992R11kFSXCs0CwGEw_G55W+0N8n7zf-64iN_Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi>
Cc: "www-validator@w3.org" <www-validator@w3.org>
Interesting - that's now how I read that, but I can see how you might
interpret it that way.  I read it as "the HTML5 spec needs to stop saying
things are obsolete if some other group starts developing an extension
spec."  Presumably HTML5 should achieve that by removing any reference to
the feature if the extension is stand-alone (like longdesc or rev).

As to the validator, I read the clause as saying "Once an extension
progresses appropriately, W3C staff should ensure that the validator is
updated accordingly."

I like my interpretation more, because it seems a little less dangerous ;-)


On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 8:40 AM, Jukka K. Korpela <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi>wrote:

> 2014-04-18 16:15, Sam Ruby wrote:
>
>  On 04/18/2014 09:06 AM, Shane McCarron wrote:
>>
>>> To answer the basic question, it is conforming.  HTML+RDFa is an
>>> approved extension to HTML5.
>>>
>>
>> To clear up future confusion, consider filing a new bug and pointing to
>> the following comment:
>>
>> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21341#c8
>>
>
> If I read the comments right, the policy is that as soon as something has
> been defined as an extension to HTML(5) at a First Public Working Draft
> level or higher, the validator will start regarding it as valid, without
> even issuing a warning. I would say that this very much causes confusion.
>
> This sounds very messy, and it means that there is no tool for checking
> whether a document conforms to the HTML5 CR or, in the future, the HTML5
> specification.
>
> Yucca
>
>
>
Received on Friday, 18 April 2014 16:26:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 14:18:10 UTC