Re: HTLM 3.0 <A> definition

Wolfgang Rieger (rieger@muc.de)
Fri, 16 Dec 1994 09:42:25 +0100


Date: Fri, 16 Dec 1994 09:42:25 +0100
To: www-html@www0.cern.ch
From: rieger@muc.de (Wolfgang Rieger)
Subject: Re: HTLM 3.0 <A> definition
Message-Id: <94Dec16.093552met.25667-2@colin.muc.de>

michaelj@relay.relay.com wrote:

>I've seen instances in HTML documents generated by WebMaker that contain
>anchors with no end tag, as if the anchor DTD were:
>
>  <!ELEMENT A   - O %A.content -(A)>
>
>rather than
>
>  <!ELEMENT A   - - %A.content -(A)>
>
>It seems like there is no technical reason why this could not be made the
>actual DTD for the anchor element. It's even useful, when the anchor does not
>contain an HREF, only a NAME or ID. Might encourage sloppy coding, though.
>What do others think about this?
>

It is common usage, that for elements which appear in inclusion exception 
lists end tag omission is not allowed. Otherwise the place where an end tag 
would be implied by a SGML parser would depend very much on the version of 
the HTML DTD used, since it would be the first start tag not allowed in the 
content of A preceding an end tag of an element enclosing the anchor tag.

That was: regarding _SGML parsers_. A WWW client would either use a simpler 
method (deviating from them SGML standard), or clients would have to be 
SGML-aware. Both are undesirable consequences.

Finally, not only WWW clients would have to figure out where the A element 
ends, but authors of HTML documents would have to do that, too.
------------------------------------------
Wolfgang Rieger
c/o Buero fuer Software-Entwicklung
Frankfurter Ring 193a
80807 Munich
Germany

Tel. : +89 323 19 93	Fax: +89 323 19 93
Email: rieger@colin.muc.de
------------------------------------------