- From: Jens Oliver Meiert <jens@meiert.com>
- Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2017 22:39:43 +0100
- To: Claude Martin <Claude.Martin@msg-systems.com>
- Cc: "www-validator@w3.org" <www-validator@w3.org>
> Shouldn’t the validator at least give a “warning” or “notice” for missing > <head>, <body> and </p>? No, it’s valid :) > I’m sure there are reasons for this, but it doesn’t help at all to find > bugs. There are only few cases where this can lead to something like a bug; among the most popular are scenarios like <p><img>, which an author may have meant to result in <p></p><img>—implying an anonymous block element—but end up as <p><img></p>. Is this something you experienced? Other than that, when authors consistently omit *all* optional tags, it leads to rather predictable and very understandable (for minimal) markup. I’m feeling free to refer to a rather simple case, but one that would otherwise mean a rather awful lot of HTML code: view-source:https://meiertrd.com/. -- Jens Oliver Meiert https://meiert.com/en/
Received on Friday, 27 January 2017 21:40:36 UTC