- From: Steven Champeon <schampeo@hesketh.com>
- Date: Wed, 09 Jul 1997 15:50:34 -0400
- To: PatrickMc@usa.net, Paul Prescod <papresco@technologist.com>
- Cc: Jordan Reiter <jreiter@mail.slc.edu>, www-html@w3.org
At 09:22 PM 7/9/97 +0200, Patrick McElhaney graced us with: > Paul Prescod wrote: > > No, you still don't understand. <P> is not the p tag. It is a P > > start-tag. </P> is the P end tag. <P>abcd</P> is a complete P element. Paul, for crying out loud. Next thing you're going to be quoting from the Book of Goldfarb. I ought to knock you for not clearly specifying that "abcd" as used above was of course merely a placeholder for #PCDATA. And the question arises, is <P>abcd</P> really the complete element, since it can contain #PCDATA? What about those elements which do not allow #PCDATA but which allow #CDATA? We're talking about the difference between referring to something in theory and in practice. And <P> is the worst example, since it has been the center of so much controversy over its proper use. > That's a new one to me. Is there such a thing as a <P> start tag or a > <P> end-tag? What do you call <IMG>? A tag. ;-) I mean, come on, Paul - at least he wasn't referring to *attributes* as tags, as in "the HREF tag" and "the ISMAP tag"... Steve -- Steven Champeon | What we do not understand http://www.hesketh.com/schampeo | we do not possess. http://www.jaundicedeye.com | - Goethe
Received on Wednesday, 9 July 1997 15:51:33 UTC