- From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
- Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2014 08:49:37 -0600
- To: Guus Schreiber <guus.schreiber@vu.nl>
- Cc: www-validator@w3.org, "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi>
- Message-ID: <CAOk_reH7PLG-HRzkMW4NAPtZegc37LCLenUTm64QDuJHpbJ1ww@mail.gmail.com>
Yeah - I get that. I just didn't want the validator / webmaster to become a bottleneck for publication. I don't know how long it takes to get stuff like this resolved. On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 8:38 AM, Guus Schreiber <guus.schreiber@vu.nl> wrote: > > > On 06-02-14 15:12, Shane McCarron wrote: > >> I know it can be challenging to use CSS instead of embedding >> presentational attributes in HTML, but this feels like a simple global >> change to your spec that would be more consistent with w3c best >> practices. I would be happy to help with the edits so this 'bug' >> doesn't get in the way of your publishing. Let me know. >> > > I know how to move it to CSS, that's not the issue. The point is: this bug > in the validator creates a problem for us at a critical point in time. I > simply want it repaired. > > Guus > > > >> On Feb 6, 2014 7:35 AM, "Guus Schreiber" <guus.schreiber@vu.nl >> <mailto:guus.schreiber@vu.nl>> wrote: >> >> >> >> On 06-02-14 13:53, Jukka K. Korpela wrote: >> >> 2014-02-06 12:09, Michael[tm] Smith wrote: >> >> > Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@målform.no >> <mailto:xn--mlform-iua@m%C3%A5lform.no>>, 2014-02-06 03:10 +0100: >> >> [...] >> >> Mike, you are not answering the question. >> >> >> You're right, sorry. >> >> >> Mike, you are still not answering the question. >> >> As I understand it, you're probably suggesting I should try >> to answer the >> question of why, in the particular document that the OP >> cited, using >> legacy >> table@border=1 markup for presentational purposes is a >> better choice >> >> >> Whatever Leif may have suggested (and I don't think he suggested >> that), >> the original question was: >> >> "Is this a validator bug?" >> >> The answer is that @border is conforming in HTML5 and >> that the validator >> has a bug if it does not allow it. There was a change >> proposal >> process to >> have @border added back into the spec, and the CP >> prevailed. >> >> >> OK, understood. As far as that goes, could you please take a >> minute to >> file >> a bug report? >> >> >> I don't get it. It seems that the validators >> http://validator.w3.org and >> http://validator.w3.org/nu/ were recently changed to report the >> border >> attribute as an error, against the draft specifications and >> against what >> http://www.validator.nu does. Instead of fixing this bug, you're >> suggesting opening a bug report and, as per your later comment, to >> continue the discussion there. >> >> What is there to be discussed? Either you fix the bug, or you >> don't. I >> don't think there is anything to be discussed, as the draft >> specifications are so clear. What the specifications should say >> is a >> different issue >> >> And I suppose the original poster deserves a simple answer to >> the simple >> question (and to the natural followup question "when will it be >> fixed?"). >> >> >> I woud be very grateful if it could be fixed soon. We are going to >> REC with 8 docuemtns from different editors, where many use this >> feature. The Webmaster will complan if the this "bug" pops up. >> >> Thanks for the quick responses, >> Guus >> >> PS I personally don't like the border thing either, but as chair I >> have a different role. >> >> >> >> >> Yucca >> >> >> >>
Received on Thursday, 6 February 2014 14:50:05 UTC