HTML validation and these new tags.

[KenAndCorey]

Won't all these new attributes cause (X)HTML validation warnings and
errors? Is there a simple way around this?

[weebit]

Valid point. Another point I would like to make is "Can this be abused
by spammers, and cause schema's hard work, plus everyone that is helping
to loose credibility? Plus the future many websites using it correctly
will have done everything right just to be ousted by spammers looking
like they have richer content...Thus it will become something else that
the search engines drop support for.

I hate to be the party pooper, but... sorry just asking. Are there any
secure measures put in place to keep this from being abused? Or will
this turn in to be schema farm websites later on?

sorry had to ask /weebit hides

-------- Your Message --------

> Won't all these new attributes cause (X)HTML validation warnings and
> errors? Is there a simple way around this?

--
Help us award the online tutorials community. Join us at: Get Your Geek On! http://www.getyourgeekon.info
About us: http://www.getyourgeekon.info/page.php?page=about

[Igor]

Microdata is a part of HTML5, so it will not cause validation errors
for HTML5.

[Richard Tank]

Even if it does cause validator problem, as far as SEO goes it worth
it.

[Peter Murray]

I was curious about something similar, except with XHTML validation.
As Igor pointed out, the added tags are fine for HTML5, but the use of
a boolean attribute ('itemscope') will cause problems for XML parsers
unless it is properly well-formed. To do so, one would have to say:

itemscope="itemscope"

There is a discussion of this in a blog entry of mine:

http://dltj.org/article/schema-org-invalid/

(Thanks to Bruce D'Arcus in the comments to that post for pointing me
in the right direction.)


Peter

[thek...@gmail.com]

HTML is not XHTML. This site will help you understand the difference and perhaps relieve your prejudices: http://www.webkit.org/blog/68/understanding-html-xml-and-xhtml/

[Ben Atkin]

It mostly validates. The openingHours in the example at the bottom of the LocalBusiness page doesn't validate, though:

validation results: http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fjsbin.com%2Fudoce3&charset=%28detect+automatically%29&doctype=Inline&group=0

web page sent to validator: http://jsbin.com/udoce3

example copied and pasted from: http://schema.org/LocalBusiness

Is this a pending change to HTML5? Or was it just a mistake to use a time tag instead of just using a span with a content attribute?

I don't think it's worth circumventing the spec to get the little semantic value of using the time tag.

Ben

P. S. this tipped me off to it:

http://tantek.com/2011/155/t5/schemaorg-html5-fork-smoke-openinghours-time-duration