- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 00:46:44 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
- Cc: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
On Tue, 14 Jul 2009, Lachlan Hunt wrote: > Ian Hickson wrote: > > On Fri, 19 Jun 2009, Simon Pieters wrote: > > > I think the spec should allow = in unquoted attribute values again, > > > because it seems annoying to have to quote href attributes when the URL > > > has an =. > > > > > > The authoring mistakes that banning the = was intended to catch are > > > almost always caught by other errors, I think. > > > > <img src=foo.jpeg alt= class=photo> > > Sure, there are edge cases that occur with almost every conformance decision > we make. It's a trade off. It just depends whether you think it's more > valuable to catch errors like that, or to allow something much more common > like this, copied from google.com: > > <a href=/advanced_search?hl=en>Advanced Search</a> > > Or maybe we can find a solution that works for both scenarios. I'm not > sure what might work, though, at least not without making the parsing > much more complex. I think it's better to catch these errors than allow quote omission in those edge cases. On Tue, 14 Jul 2009, Simon Pieters wrote: > > We could set a flag when seeing whitespace in the before attribute value > state, and then check the flag when seeing = in the unquoted attribute > value state. It would make parsing more complex for parsers that report > parse errors, but not much more complex. > > <a b= c=d> and <a b==c> would be in error but <a b=c=d> not. That's far too confusing IMHO. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Wednesday, 29 July 2009 00:47:19 UTC