- From: Daniel W. Connolly <connolly@beach.w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 18 Feb 1996 23:30:16 -0500
- To: Abigail <abigail@tungsten.gn.iaf.nl>
- Cc: www-html@w3.org
In message <199602122315.AAA16878@tungsten.gn.iaf.nl>, Abigail writes:
>You, Jonsm@aol.com wrote:
>++
>++ I would suggest these categories:
>++
>++ 1) Errors - pages containing severe errors like overlapping tags,
>++ quote/comment problems. Any page that can't be parsed by a SGML system gets
>++ this rating. This doesn't mean all of the tags/attributes will be understoo
>d,
>++ it just means that the page is not lexically correct.
>
>That's quite hard to do. While
><img src = foo.gif alt = "bla bla>Text <img src = foo.gif"> or
><!-- -- -- Comment comment -- --> Text text <!-- -- Foo -->
>are most likely "errors", they _are_ correct SGML.
But it's easy to issue warnings in these cases. For example, in
the implementaiton accompanying "A Lexical Analyzer for HTML and Basic SGML,"
at: http://www.w3.org/pub/WWW/MarkUp/SGML/#sgml-lex
I implemented a warning for missing quotes:
excerpt from http://www.w3.org/pub/WWW/MarkUp/SGML/sgml-lex/sgml.l
$Id: sgml.l,v 1.9 1996/02/07 15:32:28 connolly Exp $
/* <a href = ^http://foo/> -- unquoted literal HACK */
<ATTRVAL>[^ "\t\n>]+{ws} {
ERROR(SGML_ERROR,
"attribute value needs quotes",
yytext, yyleng);
ADD(SGML_LITERAL, yytext, yyleng);
BEGIN(ATTR);
}
It would be simple enough to add warnings for the case of > within
attribute value literals and comment declarations with multiple
comments (e.g. <!-- xxx -- -- yyy -->)
Dan
Received on Sunday, 18 February 1996 23:30:29 UTC