- From: Jukka K. Korpela <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi>
- Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2005 08:50:28 +0300 (EEST)
- To: www-validator@w3.org
On Tue, 9 Aug 2005, Ritchey Mulhollem wrote: > Making rows and cols a required attribute of a textarea is pointless because > the style sheet over rides it!! Rows and Cols should be depricated because > the use of CSS makes them an obsolete hold over. Your opinions on what _should_ be required is immaterial in validation, which works purely on the formal syntax definition, the DTD. If you wish to use modified syntax rules, create a DTD of your own. It isn't really that difficult, see http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/html/own-dtd.html Of course, your document would not comply with HTML specifications then - a customized DOCTYPE declaration alone causes that. Moreover, this would not change the way browsers behave. The behavior of a browser in the absence of required attributes is not specified in the specification and should be treated as unpredictable, though sometimes it is, in practice, a predictable mess. Style sheets are an optional feature and might not be supported by a browser, or the support might be disabled in a browser. > Why force me to write <textarea class="textarea" rows="0" cols="0"> all the > time??? It's a waste of bandwidth!! If you care about bandwidth at _that_ level, go ahead and remove the quotation marks too. ;-) Seriously, the amount of characters in such markup is completely irrelevant in practice. How many textarea elements have you got on a page? Using rows="0" cols="0" means, by the specification, that the visible size of the area is zero rows and zero columns. This is rather pointless; moreover, browsers actually get this wrong and use some (small) default size instead. Including _wrong_ attribute value just to please a validator is worse than pointless; I don't think you should use a validator if that's what it leads you to. -- Jukka "Yucca" Korpela, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
Received on Wednesday, 10 August 2005 05:50:34 UTC