- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 05:50:09 +0000
- To: www-validator-cvs@w3.org
- CC:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=1500 ------- Comment #2 from ian@hixie.ch 2006-08-15 05:50 ------- (In reply to comment #1) > Could you give more precisions of what you mean by "treat as HTML" in the > context of formal DTD validation, which is what the validator does? I mean handle as described by the XML spec instead of handled as described by the SGML spec. > Any normative reference would be more appreciated. I don't think it's a good > idea to base the validator's behavior on a message in a w3c mailing-list. The only normative reference is the HTML5 working draft: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#authors-using-html You'll never see a normative reference from the ex-HTML working group, they never update their errata. The best you'll see from them is the e-mail I posted above. > > I would like to see the validator reject any XHTML-sent-as-text/html as being of > > the wrong MIME type. > > I do not see a direct link between the rest of your comment and the conclusion > that XHTML-sent-as-text/html should be plain and simply rejected. Are you > suggesting that it should "be treated as HTML", "checked against appendix C > rules", or "rejected". Please precise your request. Any of those three options would be fine by me. > Until we have the unicorn tool ready for prime time, my proposed solution is > that whenever the validator finds an XHTML 1.0 doctype document served as > text/html, it adds a note to its output encourageing the author to check their > documents against the appC checker. > > Would that be an acceptable solution? So long as it doesn't make the author think that what they're doing is ok, I'll be happy. > Also, please feel free to send in test cases, as well as patch proposals, which > would help us treat your request quickly. See bug 14, where Terje cited a testcase that I wrote. The two testcases that I wrote for this were: http://damowmow.com/playground/html-not-xml.html http://damowmow.com/playground/html-not-xml-2.html Some other testcases would be http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml2/ or http://www.w3.org/People/olivier/ for example. Both of those should be flagged as being incorrectly labelled, as they are XHTML but are sent as text/html.
Received on Tuesday, 15 August 2006 05:50:23 UTC