- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 04 Sep 2011 01:27:53 +0000
- To: public-html@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14020
Summary: HTML5+Microdata documents are not conforming HTML5
documents
Product: Validator
Version: HEAD
Platform: All
URL: http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/infrastructure#other-appl
icable-specifications
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: HTML5
AssignedTo: mike@w3.org
ReportedBy: xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no
QAContact: www-validator-cvs@w3.org
CC: public-html@w3.org
BACKGROUND:
The W3C Validator checks for 'Conforming HTML5 documents" [0a]. Whereas
Validator.nu checks for 'Conforming documents' per the Living Standard [0b].
ISSUE:
The W3 validator's HTML5 conformance checker service currently does not
discern between conforming HTML5 documents and conforming HTML5+Microdata
documents - for both of them, the validator emits the same stamp:
"This document was successfully checked as HTML5!"
This contradicts with the outcome of the HTMLWG's ISSUE-140 [1][2], after
which HTML5' Extensibility section (see especially 'other applicable
specifications' [3] and onwards]) makes it clear that a document which
implements an applicable spec with HTML5-different semantics, is not a
conforming HTML5 document. Which is exactly the situation we have in the case
of HTML5+Microdata: When Microdata syntax is applied, a group of HTML5-invalid
and HTML5-semantic-free attributes are changed into HTML5+Microdata-valid and
HTML5+Microdata-semantic attributes.
It is not against the HTML5 spec to perform conformance checking of an
HTML5+Microdata profile - on the contrary. But it is against HTML5 for the
validator to pretend as if documents augmented with Microdata syntax have been
"successfully checked as HTML5" - they have not. It would however be in line
with the spec to state that they have been "successfully checked as
HTML5+Microdata".
The W3 Validator should be brought in line with the HTML5 spec ASAP. The
borders of the spec - and its extensibility options, are two sides of the same
coin.
I suppose that Validator.w3.org as a minimum must offer pure HTML5
conformance checking. And thus that HTML5+Microdata checking would be an
additional conformance checking service. Howeveer, this bug can formally be
solved in 2 ways:
1. by starting to stamp HTML+Microdata documents as invalid.
(This option also cover the possibility to start to offer separate
conformance checking for HTML5 docs as well as
HTML5+Microdata docs.)
2. by halting to offer HTML5 conforance checking - and only offer
HTML5+Microdata checking
The 1st option seems like the logical one. Given that there is an effort to
join RDFa and Microdata [4], it might also - for the time being, be best to
stamp Microdata as invalid instead of creating a new validation profile. [Which
alludes to a third way to solve this bug: that microdata/RDFa becomes part of
HTML5.]
[0a] http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/infrastructure#conforming-html5-documents
[0b]
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/infrastructure.html#conforming-documents
[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Mar/0574#start574
[2] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9178
[3] http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/infrastructure#other-applicable-specifications
[4] http://www.w3.org/mid/4E04A795.5020609@arcanedomain.com
--
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Sunday, 4 September 2011 01:27:54 UTC