RE: Accessible Authentication

I'm happy to leave it there, other than to say that the well-formedness of entire documents is indeed XML specific, but the well formedness of elements applies to SGML, XML and HTML.

Steve


-----Original Message-----
From: Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk> 
Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2023 2:11 AM
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Subject: Re: Accessible Authentication

On 15/11/2023 00:53, Steve Green wrote:
> Yes, and I still maintain that "elements are nested according to their specifications" means that parent and child elements must be nested as per the specification. I am not saying that "it can be interpreted that way". I am saying that's what it actually means. I don't see any room for interpretation.

And yet, it comes down to a difference of interpretation of exactly that wording. Does "nested according to their specification" mean:

a) elements are nested according to the syntax of the specification (e.g. the opening and closing tags are not overlapped incorrectly, i.e. 
the well-formedness case), or
b) elements are nested according to the grammar and wider rules of the specification (including rules relating to which element is a valid child of which other element)

> If the intention was that validation was limited to the very narrow issue of well formedness, the normative text could very easily have said that.

The concept of well-formedness is XML specific, and the authors tried to be technology agnostic (for better or worse) in their wording.

Anyway, I'll leave it at that, as I lack the energy to further debate the "what did the founders *really* think 24 years ago when they drafted this, and why didn't they..."

P
-- 
Patrick H. Lauke

https://www.splintered.co.uk/ | https://github.com/patrickhlauke

https://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | https://www.deviantart.com/redux

https://mastodon.social/@patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke

Received on Wednesday, 15 November 2023 11:11:24 UTC