+1 for W3C validations: I feel more comfortable with valid code than with invalid which somehow runs on (some) browsers. Heiko
2009/8/26 David Pollak <feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> > Folks, > I've been working on the XHTML validation stuff for Lift. Basically, you > can, in dev mode, turn on validation and you'll get an "error box" at the > bottom of each screen that has a validation error as well as an error in the > console. > > I've found that a fair number of constructs that work in browsers fail > validation. > > For example: > > <div><span><form>...</form></span></div> > > fails validation (no blocks in a span and form is a block). > > <form> > <input> > </form> > > fails validation (sub-tags of form must be blocks.) > > Is this right? Is it worthwhile to add W3C validation when these > constructs are allowed by browsers? > > Thanks, > > David > > -- > Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net > Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890 > Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp > Git some: http://github.com/dpp > > > > -- My blog: heikoseeberger.name Follow me: twitter.com/hseeberger OSGi on Scala: www.scalamodules.org Lift, the simply functional web framework: liftweb.net --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" group. To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
