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

J. L. Mandelson (jlm@ugcs.caltech.edu)
Tue, 30 Jul 1996 13:55:08 -0700 (PDT)


From: jlm@ugcs.caltech.edu (J. L. Mandelson)
Message-Id: <199607302055.NAA22378@pride.ugcs.caltech.edu>
Subject: Re: Cougar DTD: Do not use CDATA declared content for SCRIPT
To: connolly@w3.org (Daniel W. Connolly)
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 13:55:08 -0700 (PDT)
Cc: joe@trystero.art.com, www-html@w3.org, papresco@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca
In-Reply-To: <199607300450.AAA21234@anansi.w3.org> from "Daniel W. Connolly" at Jul 30, 96 00:50:11 am

"Daniel W. Connolly" <connolly@w3.org> wrote:
> So why don't we use SGML's NOTATION feature? Example:
> 	<!doctype html public "..." [
> 	<!notation tcl system "application/safe-tcl">
> 	]>
> 	<head><script notation=tcl>proc foo {... } </script>
> 	</head>
> 
> For the same reason that the HREF attribute isn't an ENTITY attribute:
> it requires folks to make up a name for the entity/notation, and
> declare it far from its use. And it opens the "what's the syntax
> of an SGML prologue?" can of worms.
> 
> An alternative would be to define some NOTATIONS in the HTML DTD, and
> only refer to them in the instances. But then the HTML DTD becomes a
> centralized list of script languages -- it would need to be modified
> every time a new scripting language was deployed.

Would it be possible and/or workable to define a "inline-script"
notation that includes everything up to the first instance of
</SCRIPT> ?  Then we could have 

<SCRIPT TYPE=FooScript> default to 
<SCRIPT TYPE=FooScript NOTATION="inline-script">

so that it works gracefully with the currently existing inline scripts
out there.

	-- J. L. Mandelson