Re: [whatwg/url] Is failure ever not a syntax violation? (#219)

Right. So for example https://url.spec.whatwg.org/#concept-ipv4-parser step 9 will cause failure, but not a validation error. Keeping these two in sync is frustrating for implementations (that track conformance checking) and makes the spec harder to read. It would be much better IMO if all "validation error, return failure" steps were turned into simply "return failure". Then "validation error" would be reserved for situations that are invalid but do not cause parsing failures, allowing people to more easily distinguish what such situations are. Right now mostly it looks redundant with failure; you have to really search to find instances where there's a validaiton error but no failure.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/whatwg/url/issues/219#issuecomment-278979443