2006/11/30, Hallvord R M Steen:
> Well, nothing per the parsing section causes "ambiguities in DOM parsing"
> (assuming I understand what that means). So I'm not sure what you're
> suggesting.
It's the core of the debate, namely if <img /> isn't technically a
problem why are validators required to flag it as invalid? The counter
examples are comparisons with <div /> which isn't parsed into the DOM
most would expect when sent as HTML, and corner cases like
<base href=http://example.org/bar/>
- now, how do you resolve relative URLs in this document? This is the
sort of ambiguity the DOM parsing has to take into account - caused by
the usage of forward closing slashes within tags. If the spec can
specify simple non-ambiguous ways of parsing that like the author
expects I think we can relax validation requirements like Sam wants.
How about: a slash is ignored in the start tag of a void element if it
appears just before the closing > and it unambiguously is not part of
an attribute value.
- <br/> => no attribute, ignored
- <base href="http://example.org/bar"/> => after the closing quote, ignored
- <base href=http://example.org/bar /> => preceded by a space, so its
not part of the attribute value => ignored
- <base href=http://example.org/bar/> => could be part of the
attribute value, so treated as *being* part of it
--
Thomas Broyer
