Re: [VE][79] Error Message Feedback

On Jul 27, 2004, at 3:16 AM, David Dorward wrote:
> To quote some more of the error message:
>         This is often caused by a leftover end tag from an element that
>         was removed during editing, or by an implicitly closed element

I cannot say whether this person just did not read the explanation or 
did not understand it, but I suppose we could improve the bit on 
"implicitly closed element".

MSG 79 is a bit long already:
[[
     <p>
       The Validator found an end tag for the above element, but that 
element is
       not currently open. This is often caused by a leftover end tag 
from an
       element that was removed during editing, or by an implicitly 
closed
       element (if you have an error related to an element being used 
where it
       is not allowed, this is almost certainly the case). In the latter 
case
       this error will disappear as soon as you fix the original problem.
     </p>
     <p>
       If this error occured in a script section of your document, you 
should probably
       read this <a 
href="http://validator.w3.org/docs/help.html#faq-javascript">FAQ 
entry</a>.
     </p>
]]

I would suggest we drop part of the explanation of a leftover closing 
tag (hoping that this is trivial enough to understand) and develop the 
"implicit" part, e.g

[[
    <p>
       The Validator found an end tag for the above element, but that 
element is
       not currently open. This is often be caused by an end tag not 
matching any
       opened tag.
    </p>
    <p>
       If the matching opening tag seems to be present, it could be a 
case where an
       element cannot be within another element (e.g. you can't have a 
<ul> in a <p>),
       hence <em>implicitly</em> closing the tag, and leaving an 
orphaned closing tag.
    </p>
    <p>
       If this error occured in a script section of your document, you 
should probably
       read this <a 
href="http://validator.w3.org/docs/help.html#faq-javascript">FAQ 
entry</a>.
    </p>
]]

It probably makes the explanation bigger, but hopefully more useful.

Any opinion?
-- 
olivier