- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 03 Nov 2006 05:46:42 +0000
- To: www-validator-cvs@w3.org
- CC:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3899 ot@w3.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|REOPENED |ASSIGNED Component|Parser |Types Registry Summary|Invalid <style id=""> |invalid attribute id for | |element style in XHTML 1.1 Version|HEAD |0.7.3 ------- Comment #3 from ot@w3.org 2006-11-03 05:46 ------- (In reply to comment #2) > Created an attachment (id=442) --> (http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/attachment.cgi?id=442&action=view) [edit] Thank you for this test case. > The fact whoever closed the bug without even testing this issues marks said > person as an amateur. This comment is highly inappropriate. Inappropriate in general, as you are expected to remain polite and respectful in reporting issues with this free tool. It is also inappropriate in this particular case. Your bug report was poor and confusing. You should have: - attached a test case, or - pointed to a test case, or at least - given clear information about the document type used Instead, you gave unclear and confusing information, mentioning XHTML and quoting the XHTML 1.0 specification, hence the assumption that this is the document type you were using. The issue *was* tested with XHTML 1.0, and found inexistent there. Now that we have decent information about the issue, now that we know you were using XHTML 1.1 we will be looking into its cause and solutions. Please try to send proper bug reports in the future, and to do so with an appropriate tone. Regards, olivier
Received on Friday, 3 November 2006 05:46:54 UTC