Re: Simple(?) question on obscure comments detail

Sunil Mishra (smishra@cc.gatech.edu)
Sun, 22 Sep 1996 17:34:45 -0400 (EDT)


Date: Sun, 22 Sep 1996 17:34:45 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <199609222134.RAA12716@cleon.cc.gatech.edu>
From: Sunil Mishra <smishra@cc.gatech.edu>
To: www-html@w3.org
In-reply-to: <01I9RYOV727600721E@SCI.WFBR.EDU> (message from Foteos Macrides
Subject: Re: Simple(?) question on obscure comments detail

\\ 	Perhaps this is a problem of me not yet being clear on the precise
\\ meanings of SMGL terms, but isn't it now two for HTML:
\\ 
\\ 	<!--
\\ 	
\\ and:
\\ 	<!DOCTYPE

True, but DOCTYPE can only go at the start of the SGML document. It's an
open question if that puts it in the category of being legal *within* HTML.

\\ 	Also, wouldn't a real SGML parser handle comments in a DOCTYPE
\\ declaration, but they are presently excluded, or at perhaps "disrecommended",
\\ there for HTML?

They are? I didn't know that. I had simply assumed that a "true" HTML
parser would be able to handle things that are legal within the DOCTYPE.

Sunil