W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > July 2000

Re: On ampersands.

From: Gerald Oskoboiny <gerald@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2000 23:23:16 -0400
To: Paul McGarry <paulm@opentec.com.au>
Cc: www-validator@w3.org
Message-ID: <20000705232316.B860@w3.org>
On Wed, Jul 05, 2000 at 08:23:17PM -0400, Paul McGarry wrote:
> Gerald Oskoboiny wrote:
> > [ Paul: ]
> > > I've been trying to determine whether unentified ampersands really
> > > are invalid in attributes in html 4. I've come to the conclusion
> > > that it isn't invalid, just heavily frowned upon.
> > 
> > No, it really is invalid.
> 
> I'm going in circles here, that's what I originally thought.
> 
> If it really is invalid, why does the html 4.01 spec use the word
> 'should':
> http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/charset.html#h-5.3.2
> which has a different meaning to 'must' if I understand things 
> correctly.

There are some cases where the ampersands don't need to be
escaped, like: <p>foo & bar</p>, or <a href="foo&_bar">

-- 
Gerald Oskoboiny       <gerald@w3.org>  +1 617 253 2920
System Administrator   http://www.w3.org/People/Gerald/
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)      http://www.w3.org/
Received on Wednesday, 5 July 2000 23:23:55 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 25 April 2012 12:13:54 GMT