Re: XTHML 1.0 Strict validation of noscript

Rui del-Negro <rmn@dvd-hq.info> wrote:
> >>Considering that in 99% of cases a <noscript> will be used to provide an
> >>alternative to the output of a <script>, why allow one and not the  
> >>other?
> >
> >Beats me. But that's _not_ a validator issue.
> 
> Yes, as I mentioned in the previous message, I understood that, I was just  
> wondering if you knew the reasons behind the different treatment in the  
> DTD.

Presumably because a <script> may well not be inserting any content,
and even if it is, not necessarily at the point in the document where
the <script> appears, so it's appropriate almost anywhere. <noscript>
by contrast must pretty much always be inserting content - which might
include block tags - and therefore is only appropriate where that
content would make sense.