Re: end tags...

Peter Flynn (pflynn@curia.ucc.ie)
23 Sep 1996 10:45:31 +0100


Date: 23 Sep 1996 10:45:31 +0100
From: Peter Flynn <pflynn@curia.ucc.ie>
Subject: Re: end tags...
In-reply-to: <199609222027.PAA25238@inet.htcnet.com> (message from Carl Morris
To: msftrncs@htcnet.com
Cc: www-html@w3.org
Message-id: <199609230945.KAA29261@curia.ucc.ie>

   See, I told people this DTD is "crap"... 

Are you complaining about the HTML DTD or the syntax of SGML?

   whats wrong wiuth REQUIRED or
   OPTIONAL, no, they using numbers ... just to make sure little people
   like me won't learn it...

It doesn't take very much to learn it. If I wanted to discuss
something written in German, I'd have to learn German first. What's
your problem?

   So do you advise browsers to throw a tantraum or to be intellegent and
   bypass the error knowning what was meant?

Browsers should probably handle (almost) all the crud that people can
write. Parsers should object, and point out the error. But are you
suggesting that a browser can infallibly guess what a careless or
foolish author meant? 

   (as I said earlier, I see no reason why most all end tags can not be
   assumed...)

Many of them can. What's your problem? I think, for example, you need
to use end-tags on <H1>, otherwise the browser can't tell where the
heading ends. Same for <A>. I know some people have argued that <EM>
should be defined with an optional end-tag, so that emphasis gets
turned off automatically at the end of the paragraph.

///Peter