Re: Validation error frequencies

On Feb 3, 2008, at 15:06, Sam Ruby wrote:

> At some point we have to wonder what we are trying to accomplish  
> here. There are lots of gray lines where &lang=en in the query part  
> of a URI should be non conforming, but a space in a path might not be.


When authors do very often something that the spec defines as an  
error, I think we should examine whether it is useful to define it as  
an error or whether we should make it a conforming cowpath.

If an error is very common AND the way browsers react to the error is  
interoperable the way browsers react to the error makes intuitive  
sense to authors (i.e. the browser behavior is not crazy) AND the  
error has harmless consequences, I think we should seriously consider  
making the error into a non-error in order to cut noise from  
validation results to allow authors to focus on more important  
matters. (I suspected spaces in IRIs may be an example of this case  
but I'm not sure.)

If an error is very common AND the way browsers react to the error is  
interoperable the way browsers react to the error makes intuitive  
sense to authors (i.e. the browser behavior is not crazy) AND the  
error has less harmful consequences than the obvious workaround, I  
think we should seriously consider making the error into a non-error  
in order to avoid the more harmful consequences. (I think  
target='_blank' is an example of this case, and I'm pretty sure.)

So what I'm trying to accomplish is making HTML5 validation errors  
more useful from the author point of view.

I'd be particularly interested in your opinion on <img border='0'>  
considering your previous opinions on /> and content models (and usage  
on Planet Intertwingly).

-- 
Henri Sivonen
hsivonen@iki.fi
http://hsivonen.iki.fi/

Received on Sunday, 3 February 2008 19:52:55 UTC