php.net |  support |  documentation |  report a bug |  advanced search |  search howto |  statistics |  random bug |  login

go to bug id or search bugs for

Bug #47210 Re: DOMDocument's inferior parsing of malformed HTML
Submitted: 2009-01-24 17:26 UTC Modified: 2009-01-25 06:24 UTC
From: queen dot zeal at gmail dot com Assigned:
Status: Not a bug Package: DOM XML related
PHP Version: 5.2.8 OS:
Private report: No CVE-ID: None
View Developer Edit
Welcome! If you don't have a Git account, you can't do anything here.
If you reported this bug, you can edit this bug over here.
(description)
Block user comment
Status: Assign to:
Package:
Bug Type:
Summary:
From: queen dot zeal at gmail dot com
New email:
PHP Version: OS:

 

 [2009-01-24 17:26 UTC] queen dot zeal at gmail dot com 
Description:
------------
Re: http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=47209

I don't agree with the closure of the bug report and since it would appear that I cannot make further posts since the report has been closed, I'm making a new one.

Anyway, that the HTML in the above bug report is invalid doesn't mean that it's processing can't be improved upon.  Dismissing this as even a bug is rather like dismissing a buffer overflow in unserialize() because the input is invalid.  In both cases, the processing of invalid input needs improvement.  In this case, it's not a security issue, but that doesn't mean it's not an issue, all the same.

Closing the bug report saying, simply, that it's invalid HTML, and leaving it at that is rather like the Firefox developers saying "it's invalid HTML" and leaving it at that.  Seriously, half the web contains invalid HTML - browsers parse it, for the most part, without any problems.  Maybe you think Firefox should just refuse to render any HTML that's invalid?  If they did that, I can guarantee you that people would begin to abandon Firefox left and right and Internet Explorer would regain the market dominance they once had.

Patches

Pull Requests

History

AllCommentsChangesGit/SVN commitsRelated reports
 [2009-01-24 17:29 UTC] queen dot zeal at gmail dot com 
My suggestion: use Gecko instead of libxml.
 [2009-01-24 17:38 UTC] scottmac@php.net 
As Rob said, it's invalid HTML and not the goal of the extension, we're not trying to be a web browser here.

If you think we should change it then we welcome you patches so we can do this.
 [2009-01-24 19:39 UTC] pajoye@php.net 
hint of the day: tidy
 [2009-01-25 06:24 UTC] chregu@php.net 
And to hopefully put a final nail into this coffin:

Both Firefox/Gecko (checked with firebug) and tidy do build a DOM out of 
that tagsoup which is the same as libxml does:

<div>
<form action=""><input type="text" name="a"></form>
</div>

and not what the original author wants.

But yes, tidy sure does usually a better job than libxml2, since it's 
exactly build for tidying up HTML
 
PHP Copyright © 2001-2025 The PHP Group
All rights reserved. 		Last updated: Thu Mar 13 16:01:30 2025 UTC