- From: Ville Skyttä <ville.skytta@iki.fi>
- Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2010 00:28:05 +0300
- To: public-qa-dev@w3.org
- Cc: "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>, ted@w3.org, "Dominique Hazael-Massieux" <dom@w3.org>, jean-gui@w3.org, tgambet@w3.org
On Saturday 19 June 2010, Ville Skyttä wrote: > On Friday 18 June 2010, Michael(tm) Smith wrote: > > About the idea of disabling XML wellformedness checks, I want to > > raise something for discussion here that I've already also brought > > up off-list, which is: I don't think we should do XML > > wellformedness checking on pages that are served as text/html. > > If we don't do that (for non-XML docs or at all) and leave it to > SGML::Parser::OpenSP, validator will be bitten by OpenSP's XML limitations. It just occurred to me that because these limitations concern XML constraints that are not enforced, it should be ok to run the wellformedness checks only in cases where OpenSP does not report any errors. This and the idea of reporting only the first error occurred could be considered less user friendly though as people would find out about possible additional errors only after revalidating after fixing the previously reported ones. But on the other hand often there are many errors that is just fallout that doesn't need fixing -- only the original one causing them does -- that I'm not sure if reporting all of them is that user friendly either. So I suppose the idea of possibly not reporting all possible errors at once would be acceptable. I'll do some experiments.
Received on Friday, 18 June 2010 21:28:45 UTC