Re: YAWB: trying to follow TFM (long reply)

Alexandre Rafalovitch (arafalov@socs.uts.EDU.AU)
Fri, 29 Aug 1997 15:43:20 +1000 (EST)


Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 15:43:20 +1000 (EST)
From: Alexandre Rafalovitch <arafalov@socs.uts.EDU.AU>
To: www-html@w3.org
In-Reply-To: <199708282055.VAA09639@imbolc.ucc.ie>
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.95.970829153733.3172A-100000@woodwall>
Subject: Re: YAWB: trying to follow TFM (long reply)

On 28 Aug 1997, Peter Flynn wrote:

I will things you point out with nsgml, but some of them I would like to
clarify.

> Alexandre Rafalovitch writes:

>    But I was testing some of the things that
>    should be tags/text/errors on current web browsers and saw very different
>    behaviour. Eg. Netscape3 would treat <234> as text, but </234> as
>    tag(undisplayed). MSIE, treat both as tags and ignore them. 
> 
> Both <234> and </234> are garbage in terms of HTML and should be
> rejected out of hand as gross errors. It think it is possible to make
> them valid SGML, but only by surgery on the SGML Declaration, and I
> can't think offhand of many applications that would need element names
> to be all digits.
> 

I did not expect it to be treated as tags. I expected them to be treated
as data characters as by context sensetive rule of SGML (if I understood
it correctly), if < and </ is not followed by name-start-char it is not
tag start. So, both NS and MSIE should have displayed <234> foo </234>.
Same goes for <!, doctype..>, it should be treated as text.
Correct?

Thanks for FAQ stuff, I have not seen it before, but it is usefull.

Regards,
  Alex.