[cgiapp] Re: [OT] HTML::Parser::PurePerl

[Ron Savage]

Hi Folks

On Thu, 2009-03-05 at 13:55 -0500, Mark Stosberg wrote:
> > Although looking at the bigger picture... How bad would it be to demand 
> > more compliant HTML from ValidateRM users? After all, it's a little bit 
> > like having "use strict;".
> 
> It's certainly a best practice to have valid XHTML, but it may not always be
> the case, especially in development, or consider an application that has legacy
> HTML, but you want to switch the backend to use better tools, like ValidateRM.
> 
> Dynamic pages can be particularly tricky to make perfectly compliant, as different variations of HTML may be pushed out depending on the query.
> 
> I definitely vote for continuing on in the spirit of HTML::Parser and allowing for "real world" HTML as much as possible.

The question is, as I see it, which module should be used to enforce
strictness (after you decide that's what you want to do).

Surely there are enough XML-oriented tools available to do this.

I don't see it as the role of either HTML::Parser::Simple or
Data::FormValidator::*.

-- 
Ron Savage
ron at savage.net.au
http://savage.net.au/index.html