- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 21:17:20 +0300
On Apr 26, 2005, at 19:16, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > Henri Sivonen wrote: >> What do you suggest the parser layer of an text/html conformance >> checker say about >> <input checkbox ...>? >> 1. Silently treat as <input type="checkbox" ...>? >> 2. Treat as <input type="checkbox" ...> but warn? >> 3. Treat as <input checkbox="checkbox" ...> causing an error to be >> reported on a higher layer? >> 4. Treat as fatal error in the parser? > > A combination of 3 and 4. As |checkbox="checkbox"| is not a valid > attribute and not a valid attribute value of the invalid attribute as > far as I know. If you pick 4, you never get to the higher layer. > Or did you mean something else by 4? (It might be that we just > agree...) I meant that in case 4 the error would be reported in the component that has responsibilities similar to the responsibilities of the XML processor in the XHTML case. Since an XML processor would not flag <input checkbox="checkbox"/> as an error, I think requiring the HTML parser to know about particular attributes would be bad design. My vision of a conformance checker looks like this: http://hsivonen.iki.fi/img/what-wg-conformance-checker.png I think the requirements for conformance checkers should be formulated in such a way that the box labeled "Tag-level HTML parser" would not need to know about any particular element or attribute names. -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen at iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Tuesday, 26 April 2005 11:17:20 UTC