W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > November 2003

Re: The <blockcode> and <l> elements

From: Ernest Cline <ernestcline@mindspring.com>
Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2003 04:43:54 -0500
Message-ID: <410-22003110994354109@mindspring.com>
To: "W3C HTML List" <www-html@w3.org>

> [Original Message]
> From: Lachlan Hunt <lhunt07@postoffice.csu.edu.au>
>   Maybe <blockcode> should be either:
> 1. <!ELEMENT blockcode (blockcode, l)*>
> 2. <!ELEMENT blockcode (PCDATA | blockcode | Inline)*>
>   Remember, the content model for <l> is
>       <!ELEMENT l (#PCDATA | Inline)*>
> so there is no restriction on using Inline elements for either of these 
> two options.
>   I prefer version 1, since it is more strict and forces more structure 
> than version 2, though anything that's valid for version 1 MUST
> also be valid for version 2 (since <l> is an Inline element).

Of course, that raises the question of whether <l> should be an
Inline element. It is already noted as an issue that as an Inline
element, the following code is valid, if semantically ridiculous.
 <l>When is a <l>line</l> a </l>line</l>?</l>

IMO <l> needs to be moved out of the Inline Module and into
the Block Module with elements that have a content model of: 
	(PCDATA | Inline)*
changed so that their content model is:
	(PCDATA | Inline | l)*

(Alternatively, the content model of <l> needs to be changed
 to exclude <l> which would be simpler from the viewpoint of
 implementation, but I think that while <l> is not quite a block
nor an inline element, it is more blockish than inlinish.
Received on Sunday, 9 November 2003 04:44:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:06:06 UTC