warnings for shorttags

Aaargh!  Why doesn't this list give us a reply-to?
Just accidentally sent this to Olivier instead of the list :-(

On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 16:27:10 +0900
Olivier Thereaux <ot@w3.org> wrote:

> Only few of the warnings are in the "this is strictly speaking OK but
> very likely to cause problem" realm, mostly they are "I had to use
> some guessing, and if the guessing was wrong, it may twist the
> results, so please double-check". 

Um, shorttags warnings as implemented at valet and htmlhelp are very
firmly in the "will cause problems" realm.  Only if you select "fussy"
mode at valet do you also get warnings of things that are likely not
a problem.

Happy to look up and repost details, but I'm sure they're on record
at lists.w3.org from the days when I was more active in this field.

> 
> e.g:
> http://qa-dev.w3.org/wmvs/HEAD/check?uri=http://qa-dev.w3.org/wmvs/HEAD/dev/tests/sgml_customdtd.html

The warning there has nothing to do with shorttags.  And people who
use custom DTDs are a different audience to those who go away in
disgust when they discover their obviously-wrong typo that the
validator ("ugh, how useless and buggy" had permitted.  Bear in
mind users who post here and get pointed to an explanation are
sure to be a tiny fraction of those who abandon the validator
as useless when they make the same discovery.

> For these reasons, I think we should be extremely careful with the way
> we make warnings prominent on otherwise valid/conforming documents.

That's presupposing you make no distinction between different
types of "warning".

-- 
Nick Kew

Application Development with Apache - the Apache Modules Book
http://www.apachetutor.org/


-- 
Nick Kew

Application Development with Apache - the Apache Modules Book
http://www.apachetutor.org/

Received on Sunday, 30 September 2007 08:53:45 UTC