- From: David Woolley <forums@david-woolley.me.uk>
- Date: Thu, 03 May 2007 07:34:25 +0100
- To: www-html@w3.org
Paul Nelson (ATC) wrote: > Or, some bright person/people come up with a tool that reads the badly > form content and converts it into a well formed site with the click of a > button. The tool could show the person where the potential fixes are and You mean like HTML Tidy <http://www.w3.org/People/Raggett/tidy/>? These days with DOMs, and XML libraries that serialise to HTML, it just needs one parser to implement the full error recovery rules and allow the internal DOM to be written. The problem area with all of these would be scripts, using document.write. HTML4 requires that the document be valid with or without the document.writes executed, but I think the HTML5 rules allow the script to generate unbalanced tags. An alternative, also with a script problem, would be to require HTML5 browsers when running with permission to write to the local machine (i.e. not in kiosk mode) to force a user dialogue offering to save a corrected version on the completion of document loading (or page exit if the page was incompletely loaded - some pages are open ended). That would shame the author as well as making it easy to fix. It would require that a DOM without script manipulations be maintained, in the case of well behaved scripting. The big problem with the naming and shaming approach is that the first browser to opt out is likely to gain market share.
Received on Thursday, 3 May 2007 06:34:47 UTC