Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon, but your browser is incompatible with the new version.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
mozilla.dev.tech.html
About this group
Subscribe to this group
This is a Usenet group - learn more
Message from discussion Style behaviour seems to be wrong, whrn using with LI's
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
dolphinling  
View profile  
 More options Sep 16 2006, 2:59 pm
Newsgroups: mozilla.dev.tech.html
From: dolphinling <li...@dolphinling.net>
Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2006 14:59:48 -0400
Local: Sat, Sep 16 2006 2:59 pm
Subject: Re: Style behaviour seems to be wrong, whrn using with LI's
Print | View thread | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
C A Upsdell > wrote:

> dolphinling wrote:
>> C A Upsdell > wrote:
>>> vi...@mail.ru wrote:
>>>> Here are some examples, when colorings doesn't work, when it looks like
>>>> it should.
>>>> Tested in 1.5.0.6. In MS Explorer 6.0 they are all colored. Is it a
>>>> bug?

>>> Your code is invalid.  Validate it, fix the errors, make sure you
>>> have a DOCTYPE that triggers standards mode, then try again.

>> That is utterly pointless. The *entire point* of the question is
>> whether we should be displaying the invalid code differently than we are.

>> Please, please don't respond with that answer, *ever*.

> The standards specify what browsers should do with valid code.  They do
> not specify what to do with invalid code, so if your code is invalid,
> you are at the mercy of how a particular version of a particular browser
> handles your errors.

Yes. I know that and you know that, but when the question is "Is this a bug?",
it's *not a useful answer*. The only useful answer is "yes" or "no", coupled
with an explanation of *why*.

The same is true but even more so in bugzilla. Remember, over 99% of web pages
are invalid. As a real-world web browser, we have to still display them in a
useful way. It's possible for us to have a bug even in a case where the spec
doesn't tell us what to do, and throwing out bugs because the page is invalid
can lead to us missing bugs.

Note that it's perfectly acceptable to say, *after* you've explained why it is
or isn't a bug, something like "If you're the author of this page and want to
make sure it works properly in all browsers, you might want to try making sure
your code is valid." Being helpful to the author is fine; throwing out bugs
without valid reasoning is not.

--
dolphinling
<http://dolphinling.net/>


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
©2013 Google