Looks right to me - what w3c validation did you have in mind?
On 26/08/2009 16:20, David Pollak feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com wrote:
Is this right? Is it worthwhile to add W3C validation when these constructs
are allowed by browsers?
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 9:35 AM, Timothy Perrett timo...@getintheloop.euwrote:
Looks right to me - what w3c validation did you have in mind?
Validating against the XHTML XSD (Strict or Transitional)
On 26/08/2009 16:20, David Pollak feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com wrote:
Is this right?
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 9:12 AM, Peter Robinett pe...@bubblefoundry.comwrote:
Would it be too complicated to let the developer choose (perhaps in
Boot.scala) whether they want a strict mode?
Even transitional mode has these restrictions
Peter Robinett
On Aug 26, 8:20 am, David Pollak
It should be invalid for span/ in any mode of XHTML (strict,
transitional) or HTML4 whatever you choose.
span/ is an inline element that was never meant to support a block
level element (form/, div/ etc.)
Browsers nowadays are very smart to render anything you throw at it
gracefully but that
Right, and even if this were the case we already provide a mechanism
for users to set the output DocType so one could just read that and
change validation mode or whatever.
Validation sounds like a good idea to me.
Regarding templates i've also been meaning to make a XSLT that smashes
together
+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
