Re: [WSG] Browsers as copilers (was) Barclays standards redesign
On 9/8/05, Chris Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: . they should refuse to parse incorrect code. Hi The issue here is what is incorrect code? -- a web coder can serve up completely valid code, according to the w3c alidator, that is really awful (this, also, is purely subjective). For actual scripting languages the same is true - a coder can serve up code from procedural hell but it runs perfectly. There may be global variables everywhere, a complete lack of business logic and no input checking on user supplied data but it could still do what it is supposed to do 100% of the time. Judging what is bad but 100% W3C valid code is subjective - especially when it comes to presentational markup languages like HTML - there are 100 ways to skin a cat. Parse errors on the other hand are easy to nab, for instance missing an end quote in an HTML attribute or misspelling a method name in a scripting language. The closest we are going to get to a compiler for markup languages is a syntax checker like that provided by the W3C, which is a development tool rather than something for the end user to mull over. HTH James
Re: [WSG] Browsers as copilers (was) Barclays standards redesign
The issue here is what is incorrect code? -- a web coder can serve up completely valid code, according to the w3c alidator, that is really awful (this, also, is purely subjective). For actual scripting languages the same is true - a coder can serve up code from procedural hell but it runs perfectly. There may be global variables everywhere, a complete lack of business logic and no input checking on user supplied data but it could still do what it is supposed to do 100% of the time. That's no different from code in any programming language.
RE: [WSG] Browsers as copilers (was) Barclays standards redesign
Exactly. I was actually thinking the other day, browsers should be more like compilers... they should refuse to parse incorrect code. Then the enforcement would be on the output end, too. Perhaps some clever person could write a Firefox extension that does this - if Chris Pederick is on this list maybe he wants to add this as an option to his excellent Web Developer Toolbar? Or perhaps it could be added as a mode for the FirefoxTIDY extension? Screenshots of a browser displaying (X)HTML errors in the same manner that a compiler does may get the message across that valid markup is important to those that make the decisions about such things. I'd certainly find it useful. Chris ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Browsers as copilers (was) Barclays standards redesign
2005/9/8, Chris Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Exactly. I was actually thinking the other day, browsers should be more like compilers... they should refuse to parse incorrect code. Then the enforcement would be on the output end, too. Perhaps some clever person could write a Firefox extension that does this ... When XHTML is used with proper MIME type no extensions are needed. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Browsers as copilers (was) Barclays standards redesign
Well Fx already do this to some extent. If you go strict strict, yes that´s two 'strict' ;-) Serving not well-formed xhtml as application/xml+xhtml to Fx will get you attention. Regards, Anders Ringqvist Chris Taylor wrote: Exactly. I was actually thinking the other day, browsers should be more like compilers... they should refuse to parse incorrect code. Then the enforcement would be on the output end, too. Perhaps some clever person could write a Firefox extension that does this - if Chris Pederick is on this list maybe he wants to add this as an option to his excellent Web Developer Toolbar? Or perhaps it could be added as a mode for the FirefoxTIDY extension? Screenshots of a browser displaying (X)HTML errors in the same manner that a compiler does may get the message across that valid markup is important to those that make the decisions about such things. I'd certainly find it useful. Chris ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
RE: [WSG] Browsers as copilers (was) Barclays standards redesign
Screenshots of a browser displaying (X)HTML errors in the same manner that a compiler does may get the message across that valid markup is important to those that make the decisions about such things. I'd certainly find it useful. although I foresee browsing with that extension may be a version of hell for many of us - can you imagine seeing the html errors for *every* page you viewed? one might want to take up gardening instead... :) ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Browsers as copilers (was) Barclays standards redesign
On 9/9/05, Paul Bennett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: although I foresee browsing with that extension may be a version of hell for many of us - can you imagine seeing the html errors for *every* page you viewed? I already see the HTML errors for every page I view [1]. The real nightmare is having the javascript console always open... so many javascript errors all over the web :( (esp. on google sites!!) [1] https://addons.mozilla.org/extensions/moreinfo.php?id=249application=firefox cheers, Andrew. http://leftjustified.net/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Browsers as copilers (was) Barclays standards redesign
On 9 Sep 2005, at 9:13 am, Andrew Krespanis wrote: I already see the HTML errors for every page I view [1]. The real nightmare is having the javascript console always open... so many javascript errors all over the web :( (esp. on google sites!!) And when you browse with the beta versions of Firefox 1.5 (DeerPark or later) the Javascript Console also flags all CSS errors (including properties that Gecko doesn't support, such as display:inline-block). Another nightmare. (all those errors in those Google ads...). Very useful for debugging, btw. Philippe --- Philippe Wittenbergh http://emps.l-c-n.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
