W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > September 2002

Re: FW: Table and Form hierarchy

From: Johannes Koch <koch@pixelpark.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 14:02:34 +0200
Message-ID: <3D7F30DA.7050600@pixelpark.com>
To: www-html ML <www-html@w3.org>
CC: Rhys Lewis <rhys.lewis@volantis.com>

Rhys Lewis wrote:
> The W3C postmaster suggested that I post this here. If anyone has comments on the attached question it would be most appreciated.
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>>From: 	Rhys Lewis  
>>Sent:	11 September 2002 12:51
>>To:	'www-html-editor@w3.org'
>>Subject:	Table and Form hierarchy
>>
>>Hello,
>>
>>We are trying to understand what may be an ambiguity in the XHTML Basic specification.
>>
>>In the specification itself, it is clear that directly nested tables are not supported. However, the DTD's appear to allow nesting via another element. For example, from the DTD is seems that a structure in which a table contains a form that itself contains a table is allowed. The question is, is this the intent? The spirit of the specification would tend to indicate that such nesting should not be allowed even though the DTD does not appear to prevent it.
>>
>>Is there some way in which I can find out whether the intent of the specification is to allow the table within form within table nesting?

When the spec says in a normative section, that nested tables are not 
allowed, then it is not allowed, whether this can be expressed in a DTD 
or not. In fact it cannot be expresed with DTD syntax. HTML specs e.g. 
also say, that the value of the href attribute must be a URI, which 
cannot be validated using the DTD.
-- 
Johannes Koch  . IT Developer
Pixelpark AG   . http://www.pixelpark.com
Rotherstraße 8 . 10245 Berlin  .  Germany
phone: +49 30 5058 - 1288  .  fax: - 1355
Received on Wednesday, 11 September 2002 08:03:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:52 GMT