W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-bpwg-ct@w3.org > November 2008

RE: [CTG] Draft 2008-11-07 / inconsistencies / validation

From: Eduardo Casais <casays@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 06:28:58 -0800 (PST)
To: public-bpwg-ct@w3.org
Cc: rotan.hanrahan@mobileaware.co
Message-ID: <578242.56556.qm@web45001.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

> I was trying to say is that well-formedness
> is not a sufficient condition. Requiring
> that you must have a space before / means
> that well-formedness according to the
> specification may not be well-formed with
> respect to what's acceptable to the device.
> So running the content through a standard WF
> validator doesn't necessarily give you the
> "all clear". 

You mentioned browsers that expect a space before the tag closing. Some browsers are peculiar about enclosing attribute values with single quotes instead of double quotes (Openwave browsers come to mind). But in all these cases, the quirks do not contradict the well-formedness of the markup. In other words, requiring well-formed content is perhaps not enough, since additional constraints must be satisfied, but it is a minimum. As I suggested:

    "Can we state that the transformed
    content returned to the terminal must
    at least be well-formed (following XML

I reiterate my question: does anybody know of a browser that will process content properly _only_ if it is _not_ well-formed -- e.g.  omitting the XML declaration, leaving tags open, parsing only uppercase element names, duplicating attributes for the same element, overlapping elements instead of nesting them, whatever? 

If not, the requirement for well-formedness could indeed constitute a minimum requirement -- not an "all clear", but a "seems basically ok".

> Validation, however, is another matter...

I already agreed that requiring validation (in the XML sense) is probably too much. 


Received on Wednesday, 12 November 2008 14:31:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:09:19 UTC