Quoting Rimantas Liubertas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

So, kidding aside, invalid is invalid.

Right, as far as generating completely new invalid elements/nodes, I'll agree
completely.

However, in my view it gets muddy when we're talking about just adding
additional attributes to an existing node. Once the XHTML has been loaded into
the browser and the DOM been built internally, I don't see a major
problem with
creating new *attributes* for each of the nodes, either as a way of storing
script information related to that node (i.e. use it as a variable container)
or as a pragmatic way to get certain non-compliant things to work
properly (for
instance, that whole autocompletion debacle that I think sparked this separate
thread).

Should it be done at all? Possibly not, but it's "less evil" in my mind than
doing horrid things like converting a valid document into a completely invalid
mess with wrongly nested elements, unclosed tags, etc

--
Patrick H. Lauke
__________________________________________________________
re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively
[latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.]
www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk
http://redux.deviantart.com
__________________________________________________________
Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force
http://webstandards.org/
__________________________________________________________

******************************************************
The discussion list for  http://webstandardsgroup.org/

See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
******************************************************

Reply via email to