W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > August 2000

RE: XHTML Invalidity / WML2 / New XHTML 1.1 Attribute

From: Dave J Woolley <DJW@bts.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 12:43:53 +0100
Message-ID: <81E4A2BC03CED111845100104B62AFB5824928@stagecoach.bts.co.uk>
To: www-html@w3.org

> From:	Cavre [SMTP:cavre@mindspring.com]
> 
> For example a HTML parser would ignore anything in between
> <smgl></smgl> or <xml></xml> but then again it might not and
	[DJW:]  
	HTML parsers are explicitly required to do the exact
	opposite.  This makes sense if you consider HTML as
	a true markup language, as the underlying plain text
	should still make some sense.  The problem arises from
	ignoring the origins of HTML and trying to add information
	as text which should not be text.

	Consider, for example, the (deprecated) font element.  If the
	rules for unrecognized elements weren't to ignore the 
	markup and render the contents, most recent web pages would
	be blank in modern browsers, whereas, in some cases, they
	are more readable because the markup as inappropriate.

	Incidentally, HTML is SGML!

> attempt to display these as standard text.  Depends on the parser.
> I will agree that backwards compatibility might be a strong reason
> why you don't want a validator/parser to simply ignore markup for 
> another vocabulary.
> 
[DJW:]  

-- 
--------------------------- DISCLAIMER ---------------------------------
Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender,
except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of BTS.

>  
Received on Tuesday, 15 August 2000 07:44:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:43 GMT