21940 2013-05-06 19:28:21 +0000 [HTML] editorial: handling attributes with the same name 2013-07-15 22:46:55 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified WHATWG HTML unspecified PC Linux CLOSED FIXED P2 normal Unsorted 1 jmdyck ian ian mike contributor oldest_to_newest 87279 0 jmdyck 2013-05-06 19:28:21 +0000 In 12.2.4.35 "Attribute name state", the final paragraph says: When the user agent leaves the attribute name state (and before emitting the tag token, if appropriate), the complete attribute's name must be compared to the other attributes on the same token; if there is already an attribute on the token with the exact same name, then this is a parse error and the new attribute must be dropped, along with the value that gets associated with it (if any). I realize that this is the earliest point at which to detect this error, and also the most convenient point at which to say how it's handled. The problem is that, at this point, a user agent can't fully handle the error, because the value to be dropped (if any) hasn't been collected yet. Presumably, the user agent, if it doesn't abort processing, must continue to run the tokenizer through its states, which will generally append characters to "the current attribute's value", where "the current attribute" must be interpreted as referring to the attribute that's (supposedly) already been dropped. To clarify things, perhaps change: the new attribute must be dropped, along with the value that gets associated with it (if any) to: the new attribute must be dropped as soon as its value is complete or: ... as soon as characters can no longer be appended to its value (Of course, you could identify the points in the state machine where this occurs, but there's rather a lot of them. You could reduce them drastically by introducing an "after attribute value" state and redirecting most attribute-ending transitions through it. [In fact, "after attribute value (quoted) state" could do the job just by deleting "(quoted)".] Then you could say, okay *this* state is where you drop a same-name attribute. But I suspect that's more change than this issue is worth.) 88921 1 ian 2013-06-07 21:44:38 +0000 I don't think it's a problem to drop something but have that thing remain the current thing. I've tried to clarify it, though. 88922 2 contributor 2013-06-07 21:44:55 +0000 Checked in as WHATWG revision r7936. Check-in comment: Clarification. http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker?from=7935&to=7936