Re: Font-style vs. phrase elements

Ron Newman (rnewman@cybercom.net)
Mon, 20 May 1996 12:52:59 -0500


Message-Id: <v01540b07adc65f947196@[205.198.81.30]>
Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 12:52:59 -0500
To: Benjamin Franz <snowhare@netimages.com>
From: rnewman@cybercom.net (Ron Newman)
Subject: Re: Font-style vs. phrase elements
Cc: Warren Steel <mudws@mail.olemiss.edu>, www-html@w3.org

On 5/20/96 at 9:49 AM , Benjamin Franz wrote:

>> >Any idea why FONT is neither a font element nor a phrase element,
>> >but instead grouped with "special" ?
>
>Probably because it is actaully used as pure presentation with no regard
>for logical levels at all. I have seen many docs with a FONT tag wrapped
>around the entire BODY content.

Remember that my question is about the HTML 3.2 *DTD*.
That DTD already prohibits using FONT in this manner:

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HEAD>
<TITLE><!-- your title here --></TITLE>
</HEAD>

<BODY>
<font size="+1">
<p>paragraph 1</p>
<p>paragraph 2</p>
</font>
</BODY>

sgmls: SGML error at -, line 8 at ">":
       FONT end-tag implied by P start-tag; not minimizable
sgmls: SGML error at -, line 10 at ">":
       FONT end-tag ignored: doesn't end any open element (current is BODY)

Given this, I don't understand why "FONT" isn't classed
as a font element in the HTML 3.2 DTD.

--
Ron Newman             rnewman@cybercom.net
Web: http://www.cybercom.net/~rnewman/home.html