W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > html-tidy@w3.org > October to December 1999

RE: tidy vs block structure

From: Stuart Updegrave <supde@microsoft.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 08:48:26 -0800
Message-ID: <5B3F16B2DB67D1119A0D00805F312AA21497FD17@RED-MSG-58>
To: "'Peter Kaiser'" <kaiser@acm.org>, html-tidy@w3.org
What you're running into is that BLOCKQUOTE is a block element, while TT is
an inline element. Inline elements can't contain block elements according to
my understanding of the formal HTML 4.0 spec. 

cheers,
~stuart 

-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Kaiser [mailto:kaiser@acm.org]
Sent: Saturday, December 04, 1999 2:13 AM
To: html-tidy@w3.org
Cc: kaiser@acm.org
Subject: tidy vs block structure


I'm puzzled at tidy's behavior on some HTML, of which this is typical,
where my intent is for "<tt>" to apply to all the text inside the
outer block, including within the inner block:

	<blockquote><tt>Indented one level.
		<blockquote>Indented two levels.</blockquote>
	Second 1-level indent.</tt></blockquote>

To my naive eye, this looks okay, but tidy (30.11.99) declares

	Warning: missing </tt> before <blockquote>
	Warning: inserting implicit <tt>
	Warning: inserting implicit <tt>

and changes it to

	<blockquote><tt>Indented one level.</tt>
		<blockquote><tt>Indented two levels.</tt></blockquote>
	<tt>Second 1-level indent.</tt></blockquote>

Tidy complains similarly about <pre> ... <Hn> ... </Hn> ... <pre>,
saying that <pre> must be closed before <Hn> and reopened after it.

Do those two kinds of nesting violate the current standard?  (If they
do, then my emotional response is "then what's the purpose of nested
structures at all?")

___Pete
Received on Monday, 6 December 1999 11:49:37 GMT

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