Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [emacs-nxml-mode] Re: False-positive validation errors

Expand Messages
  • Lennart Borgman (gmail)
    ... If you do not want to checkout the sources you can browse them on the web here: http://cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewvc/emacs/etc/schema/?root=emacs Patches use
    Message 1 of 22 , Aug 13, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      Lucas Gonze wrote:
      >
      >
      > On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 12:23 PM, Lennart Borgman (gmail)
      > <lennart.borgman@... <mailto:lennart.borgman%40gmail.com>> wrote:
      > > I think the best way to use it would be to add it to Emacs itself since
      > > nxml-mode will be a part of Emacs 23. Do you want that?
      >
      > That's a good thing and I'm for it.
      >
      > Do you know what the steps are in packaging it up? What do other
      > schemas look like in CVS?


      If you do not want to checkout the sources you can browse them on the
      web here:

      http://cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewvc/emacs/etc/schema/?root=emacs

      Patches use to be the preffered way to send changes if existing files
      are changed. I believe the new files could just be sent as attachment.
    • Lucas Gonze
      We ll need the source RNG files from James Clark to be put under the GPL by him. Is he still on this list?
      Message 2 of 22 , Aug 13, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        We'll need the source RNG files from James Clark to be put under the GPL by him.

        Is he still on this list?
      • Lucas Gonze
        I have emailed James Clark about his putting his RNG sources under the GPL.
        Message 3 of 22 , Aug 13, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          I have emailed James Clark about his putting his RNG sources under the GPL.

          On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 4:28 PM, Lucas Gonze <lucas.gonze@...> wrote:
          > We'll need the source RNG files from James Clark to be put under the GPL by him.
          >
          > Is he still on this list?
          >
        • Edward O'Connor
          ... Correct me if I m wrong, but I think nxml is correct: the above is invalid HTML 4.01. requires block children; your form needs a , , or
          Message 4 of 22 , Aug 19, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
            lucas gonze wrote:

            > Labels and inputs in forms are incorrectly flagged as invalid. In this
            > valid sample document, the label and input will be considered errors
            > and will cause nxml-mode to do stop doing useful validation:
            >
            > <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
            > "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
            > <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
            > <head><title></title></head>
            > <body>
            > <form action="" method="get">
            > <label for="inputname">Label for field: </label>
            > <input type="text" name="inputname" id="inputname" />
            > </form>
            > </body>
            > </html>

            Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think nxml is correct: the above is
            invalid HTML 4.01. <form> requires block children; your form needs a
            <p>, <div>, or (better yet) a <fieldset> to contain your <label> and
            <input>.


            Ted
          • Lucas Gonze
            ... This is XHTML 1.0 Transitional, though. The W3C validator does flag the missing block element if the form is part of an HTML 4.01 document, but doesn t
            Message 5 of 22 , Aug 19, 2008
            • 0 Attachment
              On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 6:27 PM, Edward O'Connor <hober0@...> wrote:
              > Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think nxml is correct: the above is
              > invalid HTML 4.01. <form> requires block children; your form needs a
              > <p>, <div>, or (better yet) a <fieldset> to contain your <label> and
              > <input>.

              This is XHTML 1.0 Transitional, though.

              The W3C validator does flag the missing block element if the form is
              part of an HTML 4.01 document, but doesn't flag it in an XHTML 1.0
              Transitional document. To check whether this is an error in the
              validator I looked up the DTD and didn't find the same requirement as
              HTML 4.01, and I didn't see this requirement documented in the spec.
              It's possible that I missed it.

              > lucas gonze wrote:
              >
              >> Labels and inputs in forms are incorrectly flagged as invalid. In this
              >> valid sample document, the label and input will be considered errors
              >> and will cause nxml-mode to do stop doing useful validation:
              >>
              >> <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
              >> "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
              >> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
              >> <head><title></title></head>
              >> <body>
              >> <form action="" method="get">
              >> <label for="inputname">Label for field: </label>
              >> <input type="text" name="inputname" id="inputname" />
              >> </form>
              >> </body>
              >> </html>
              >
              > Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think nxml is correct: the above is
              > invalid HTML 4.01. <form> requires block children; your form needs a
              > <p>, <div>, or (better yet) a <fieldset> to contain your <label> and
              > <input>.
              >
              >
              > Ted
              >
              >
              > ------------------------------------
              >
              > Yahoo! Groups Links
              >
              >
              >
              >
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.