- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 12:42:31 +0300
On Apr 27, 2005, at 04:13, fantasai wrote: > Henri Sivonen wrote: >> On Apr 26, 2005, at 19:08, fantasai 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? >>>> I'm inclined to choose 3. >>> >>> >>> *Why?* Why of all things would you choose to interpret it like >>> /that/? >>> It's neither reporting a useful error, nor handling it per SGML >>> rules. >> To make the separation of concerns similar to what it would be on the >> XML side while being real about SGMLness being fiction. That is, the >> parser does not need to know if an attribute is allowed. That's a job >> for a higher layer. > > I still don't understand how this interpretation is useful or required. It is useful, because it doesn't require knowledge of allowable minimizable attributes on the lowest parser level. > If you want to make <input checkbox> invalid, handle it the same way > you'd handle <input foo>. That's what I am suggesting. The parser would treat <input foo> as <input foo="foo">, which would be caught on the RELAX NG validation layer in my diagram. > Expanding the attribute from checked to checked="checked" is neither > conforming to SGML parsing rules ITYM checkbox to checkbox="checkbox". > nor helping the author understand what was wrong. Would "Attribute 'checkbox' not allowed here." or something along those lines be any more incomprehensible that validation errors in general? > I mean, I understand you're disillusioned with the state of HTML > parsing in the world, but it doesn't mean you need to be /reactionary/ > about it. Authors get constantly confused when validator.w3.org feeds them SGML fiction. Why shouldn't the QA tools be better aligned with reality? -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen at iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Wednesday, 27 April 2005 02:42:31 UTC