Re: Cougar DTD

To: Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Cougar DTD
From: Tomasz Pilat <poncjusz@ajax.umcs.lublin.pl>
Date: Sat, 10 May 1997 13:13:00 +0200 (MET DST)
cc: www-talk@w3.org, www-html@w3.org
From www-talk-request@www10.w3.org Sat May 10 08: 05:02 1997
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.970509160639.23494C-100000@www44.inria.fr>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.95.970510131033.22361D-100000@ajax.umcs.lublin.pl>
X-List-URL: http://www.w3.org/pub/WWW/Archives/Public/www-talk/

Hello.

I think I have found 2 next (little) bugs in Cougar DTD (29/IV/97).

1.) Definition for block looks like this:

<!ENTITY % block
     "P | %list | %preformatted | DL | DIV | CENTER | NOSCRIPT | NOFRAMES
      BLOCKQUOTE | FORM | ISINDEX | HR | TABLE | FIELDSET | ADDRESS">

I think there is missing pipe "|" between NOFRAMES and BLOCKQUOT.

2.) Definition for special looks like this:

<!ENTITY % special
   "A | IMG | APPLET | OBJECT | FONT | BASEFONT | BR | SCRIPT |
   | MAP | Q | SPAN | BDO | IFRAME">
  ^^^

This time there is too much pipes between SCRIPT and MAP.

Am I right?

BTW: I'm looking for good DTD parsers for Linux (perl most welcome). Any
 suggestions? I have some parsers, but they are weak - they didn't found
 this and previous (NOSCRIPT) bugs.

BTW2: According to DTD nesting NOFRAMES/NOSCRIPT (from %block) is allowed.
 Is this purposeful?

 
TIA,
Tomasz "Poncki" Piłat
---
 ______                    __     __
|   __ \.-----.-----.----.|  |--.|__|       Tomasz "Poncki" Piłat
|    __/|  _  |     |  __||    < |  |           poncki@irc.pl
|___|   |_____|__|__|____||__|__||__|        IRCNET IRC-OPerator
http://ajax.umcs.lublin.pl/~poncjusz/     http://lublin.irc.pl/~ircd/

Follow-Ups:

Re: Cougar DTD

From: Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org>

Re: Cougar DTD

From: Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@w3.org>

References:

Re: Cougar DTD

From: Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@w3.org>

Prev: Re: Cougar DTD
Next: Re: Cougar DTD
Index: Message index of www-talk@w3.org mailing list
Thread: Thread index of www-talk@w3.org mailing list