Forum Moderators: open
validates with tidy, in spite of the unclosed <p> and <li> tags. It does pick up an unclosed <br>, though.<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" lang="en">
<head>
<title>Bug that Tidy misses</title>
</head>
<body>
<h1>Bug that Tidy misses</h1>
<p>This para is unclosed.
<ul>
<li>Unclosed list item.
</ul>
</body> </html>
To me this is a major annoyance. As a command line tool it allows me to do exactly what I want, validate all or any subset of my files, etc. I have posted a bug report at SourceForge, hope it gets fixed.
The objective of this is partly to warn any other tidy users of the bug, but also to solicit help in choosing a flexible, command line based validator.
In fact, any validator that can validate multiple files without too much messing around.
Below are the results of attempting to parse this document with an SGML parser.1. Line 10, column 3: document type does not allow element "ul" here; missing one of "object", "ins", "del", "map", "button" start-tag
<ul>
^2. Line 12, column 4: end tag for "li" omitted, but OMITTAG NO was specified
</ul>
^3. Line 11, column 0: start tag was here (explain...).
<li>Unclose list item.
^4. Line 13, column 6: end tag for "p" omitted, but OMITTAG NO was specified
</body> </html>
^5. Line 9, column 0: start tag was here (explain...).
<p>This para is unclosed.
^
[edited by: tedster at 1:39 pm (utc) on Mar. 25, 2004]
[edit reason] fix scrollism [/edit]
File a bug report for the other one, for sure.
I never doubted that it was a bug, I filed a bug report [sourceforge.net] immediately, was dismayed when I read that reporting omitted end tags was a feature [tidy.sf.net] that had been requested since June 2001 :(