Re: Cougar DTD: Do not use CDATA declared content for SCRIPT

Arnoud (galactus@stack.urc.tue.nl)
Thu, 25 Jul 1996 20:14:14 +0200


From: galactus@stack.urc.tue.nl (Arnoud "Galactus" Engelfriet)
To: www-html@w3.org
Subject: Re: Cougar DTD: Do not use CDATA declared content for SCRIPT
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 1996 20:14:14 +0200
Message-ID: <2l79x4uYO9AR089yn@stack.urc.tue.nl>

In article <1.5.4.32.19960725151011.0074a18c@csclub.uwaterloo.ca>,
Paul Prescod <papresco@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
> At 08:25 PM 7/24/96 +0200, Arnoud "Galactus" Engelfriet wrote:
> >In article <31F60F07.7566@aw.sgi.com>,
> >The problem with just throwing it out of the window is that we'll
> >"meet resistance from the browser vendors", as Dan put it some time
> >ago (during the <UL SRC> debate).
> 
> My understanding was that Wilbur was "current practice" and Cougar was "cool
> features and recommended practice for the next little while". As such, I
> think we should be seriously thinking about whether we want inline scripting
> at all. Netscape can do what they want, and authors will always have the
> right to follow them, but we don't have to support bad ideas.

Sure, but if Wilbur specifies SCRIPT as it does now, with CDATA as
contents, then changing it so drastically to <SCRIPT SRC> without
contents might be a bit too much. I suspect there'll be a lot of time
between Wilbur and Cougar, so by the time Cougar becomes spec there
will be a LOT of pages with the SCRIPT as specified in Wilbur.

Perhaps we should just drop or deprecate SCRIPT, and invent a new tag
for this? That was done with IMG too back when HTML 3.0 was proposed -
the FIG tag.

Galactus

-- 
To find out more about PGP, send mail with HELP PGP in the SUBJECT line to me.
E-mail: galactus@stack.urc.tue.nl - Please PGP encrypt your mail if you can.
Finger galactus@turtle.stack.urc.tue.nl for public key (key ID 0x416A1A35).
Anonymity and privacy site: <http://www.stack.urc.tue.nl/~galactus/remailers/>