sideshowbarker

OK, yeah, at https://github.com/whatwg/dom/pull/1079 there’s a list of related browser bugs: - https://issues.chromium.org/issues/40228234 - https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1773312 - https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=241419 And from looking at those, it seems the engine changes have been implemented...

The cause is at line 7: ``` ``` The problem there is that it has "``" rather than a `` end tag. That would be much clearer if the checker...

So one part of the problem here is, the spec has changed significantly over the last couple years, while the URL-parsing library the HTML checker relies on has not changed...

> I think there's also a subtle problem with the test suite because some of the test URLs are relative to the base URL, which in turn depends on how...

Considering my previous comments a little more carefully: The tests in https://github.com/validator/tests are just copies of tests at https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/tree/master/conformance-checkers, which in turn are generated from https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/blob/master/conformance-checkers/tools/url.py, which in turn are...

> Would you please reconsider your position, add an option to allow them, or some way to configure it? I don’t really have a position on it — other than...

We no longer check the contents of `rel` values against anything — because there’s basically a nearly unbounded set of `rel` values in use. But I imagine what I could...

Thanks for raising this. I agree the error message is a bit confusing — but the message doesn’t say “data: scheme” and it’s not about the scheme. It says *“scheme...

> Oh wow. Yes that is spectacularly confusing ;-) Yeah, sorry — I’ll make time to make it less confusing

> Example: > > 1. `` > 2. `` > 3. `` What should the expected behavior for those be per the current spec? > When it gets encoding, >...