W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > May 2007

Re: Support Existing Content

From: Gareth Hay <gazhay@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2007 11:15:15 +0100
Message-Id: <95A8F9CC-2315-4870-A18E-8FC409F7B668@gmail.com>
Cc: public-html@w3.org
To: Geoffrey Sneddon <foolistbar@googlemail.com>

On 4 May 2007, at 10:54, Geoffrey Sneddon wrote:
>> [aside: maybe it's because I grew up with "Segmentation Fault"  
>> fatal errors that I don't see that kind of error handling as "wrong"]
> To write from the end user POV: What is a segmentation fault?  
> What's segmented?
>> I think "draconian" error handling leads to a much more educated  
>> author.
>> Doesn't  "Parse error : line 5" - tell you all you need to know?
> What's "parse" mean on a computer sense?
>> I certainly wouldn't be to adverse to
>> 	 "This page was written as HTML5, but it is invalid. Error is  
>> 'non-conformity - line 5'. Do you want to try this as html4?"
> Conformity to what?
I don't understand your 3 points here.
Is viewing a website, especially if it charges, not the same as  
buying a piece of software.
If it doesn't work, who is to blame?
if a program crashes your computer, and you get an error dump, who  
are you blaming? Intel for making the chip inside? or the author?
I'm not asking for the end user to see error messages, ever, I'm  
asking for authors to take the responsibility to write correct code.
I /honestly/ don't see how users are going to see these error  
messages /if/ the author has done his job.
(And for that matter if he /hasn't/ it's no worse than the site  
upgrading their, say SQL db, and it not working at all.
Do you blame MySQL or whoever for releasing a new version? or do you  
blame the site for not checking the upgrade in a non-production  
environment first?)

Someone /has/ to take responsibility, if the author is allowed to be  
lax, he can blame the UA vendor, and the UA vendor is able to blame  
the author. Why can't we implement it, so it /is/ the fault of the  

>> Where the browser will attempt to render the page minus the html5  
>> doctype declaration.
> From my POV: In quirks mode then? What if the page relies on the  
> W3C CSS Box Model? Why are we wasting CPU and memory of parsing  
> something twice?
I'm not talking about CSS and I don't recall asking for double parsing.

Received on Friday, 4 May 2007 10:15:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:20 UTC