W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > html-tidy@w3.org > July to September 1999

Re: strike, s, u tags OK in strict DTD?

From: Chuck Baslock <cbaslock@kansas.net>
Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 16:41:56 -0500
Message-ID: <001101bece41$b3853440$1b45abcd@chuck>
To: "Zac Thompson" <zthompso@mks.com>, <html-tidy@w3.org>
Ok in "Transitional"
Unrecognized in "Strict"

Per
http://validator.w3.org


----- Original Message ----- 
From: Zac Thompson <zthompso@mks.com>
To: <html-tidy@w3.org>
Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 1999 13:14
Subject: strike, s, u tags OK in strict DTD?


> 
> <strike></strike>
> <s></s>
> <u></u>
> 
> I don't think these are valid except with the Transitional ("Loose") 
> DTD.  Am I missing something, or is this a known issue?  A lot of 
> the files I'm working with contain the <u> tag right now.
> 
> ==========
> [C:/Temp/html] tidy strike.htm
> 
> Tidy (vers 7th July 1999) Parsing "strike.htm"
> 
> "strike.htm" appears to be HTML 4.0
> no warnings or errors were found
> 
> <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0//EN">
> <html>
> <head>
> <title>testing ability to catch strike, s, u</title>
> </head>
> <body>
> <p><strike>This is one way</strike></p>
> 
> <p><s>Here's another way to do it</s></p>
> 
> <p><u>This should be underlined</u></p>
> </body>
> </html>
> 
> [C:/Temp/html]
> ==========
> 
> Zac
> 
> -- 
> Zac Thompson           [mailto:zthompson@mks.com]
> Mortice Kern Systems Inc.    [http://www.mks.com]
> 185 Columbia St. W. Waterloo, ON, Canada, N2L 5Z5
> 
Received on Wednesday, 14 July 1999 17:42:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 April 2012 06:13:42 GMT