> > I just went to a bunch ofunnecessary work -- due to the W3 validation > > suite flagging unencoded '&' in a URL for the HTML 4.01 transitional > > type. > > > > Since every browser in the world must tolerate &, my opinion is that > > this is an artificially created tempest in a teapot, created by the > > failure of the validation suite writer to provide a "pedantic" mode. > > Or the failure of the specification writers to create an exception > > for this in the transitional type. > > It is not. You must encode &, otherwise > > <http://www.example.com/script.pl?foo=bar©=true> > > can be interpreted as the copyright symbol, which is not what you > intended. Encoding the ampersand will work, so just do it. And encode your '<' and '>', too. Depending on your editor of choice, just set up a macro expansion for '&' when it's followed by whitespace. This is easy enough to do in vi, emacs and (horrors) MS Word; you're on your own for other editors. (Jim Correia, how is this done in BBEdit?)Received on Friday, 8 June 2001 13:11:10 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:02 GMT