- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2012 21:14:56 +0100
- To: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Cc: public-html <public-html@w3.org>
Henri Sivonen, Tue, 11 Dec 2012 14:47:19 +0200: > On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 1:04 PM, Leif Halvard Silli wrote: >> And what do the "validation community", especially Henri and Mike, >> think? > > I have no interest in implementing polyglot checking for Validator.nu. > One of the reasons why I think there should be no polyglot REC is that > I don’t want people to ask validator developers to waste time > developing polyglot checking. (That’s not the primary reason why I’m > opposed to promoting polyglot. The main reason is that I think it’s > wrong to lure Web authors into jumping through useless hoops like > happened with Appendix C.) > > I am still interested in adding an option for flagging implied tags in > Validator.nu. That seems to be something that authors liked about > XHTML 1.0-as-text/html validation. Also, I believe it would go a long > way addressing Sam’s use case of authoring HTML so that it can be > safely fed to a non-conforming HTML parser. Well, I am, at any rate, happy to hear that you consider flagging implied tags. Also, I have suggested elsewhere that the spec should tell the validator to flag lack of use of UTF-8. You seemed positive towards that, but Ian was not into that. (But course, the validator could warn against things that are allowed by the spec.) -- leif halvard silli
Received on Tuesday, 11 December 2012 20:15:25 UTC