- From: Klaus Johannes Rusch <KlausRusch@atmedia.net>
- Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 21:30:23 CET
- To: "Richard A. O'Keefe" <ok@atlas.otago.ac.nz>
- Cc: html-tidy@w3.org
In <200201310233.PAA271991@atlas.otago.ac.nz>, "Richard A. O'Keefe" <ok@atlas.otago.ac.nz> writes: > But there is NO SUCH ANIMAL as "current processing". > Different Web browsers do it DIFFERENTLY, as I explicitly pointed out. > There is no one consistent cross-browser behaviour here. There is "current processing" in tidy, and tidy users may have used this tidy feature to generate valid markup from an input source with misplaced tags in <pre> sections. > If anyone wants to write *ML code samples, XHTML <![CDATA[...]]> > sections are the way to do that. In HTML, the only way is to stuff > them through your own entity-fying filter. ... which is basically what tidy has been doing. > Note that converting <HR> to <HR> inside <PRE> sections would > definitely be wrong. There is formal specification for how tidy reads and process a page so it cannot be wrong. In fact a specification could say that any tags between <pre> and </pre> are converted by tidy, providing the filter you mentioned above. > Another item for discussion, since other block level elements, > and IMG, OBJECT, BIG, SMALL, SUB and SUP are not allowed in PRE > context either, should these get moved outside of the > PREformatted section as well? > > You have missed a very important distinction. The element types you > have mentioned are *inline*, but <HR> is a *block*-level element type. > <PRE> is allowed to contain any inline content (stuff that would be > legal in a <P>) except specifically > IMG|OBJECT|APPLET|BIG|SMALL|SUB|SUP|FONT|BASEFONT Um, not according to the HTML standard, which allows inline elements minus the elements I listed. -- Klaus Johannes Rusch KlausRusch@atmedia.net http://www.atmedia.net/KlausRusch/
Received on Thursday, 31 January 2002 15:44:29 UTC