- From: Terje Bless <link@pobox.com>
- Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2004 15:48:50 +0200
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Malcolm Rowe <malcolm-what at farside.org.uk> wrote: >Sorry, now I'm really confused. Are you suggesting that WF2 should >(however this is achieved) set 'SHORTTAG NO' in the SGML declaration for >WF2 documents? That would make both <TABLE BORDER> and <IMG ALIGN=TOP> >invalid in WF2 documents -- why would we want to do that? As of the WebSGML Adaptations Annex ? ISO 8859:1986 TC2 ? the SHORTTAG markup minimization features can be enabled or disabled individually for STARTTAG (EMPTY, UNCLOSED, NETENABL), ENDTAG (EMPTY, UNCLOSED), and ATTRIB (DEFAULT, OMITNAME, VALUE). Your argument is pretty much the reason SHORTAG was enabled in HTML at all ? in spite of, I'll note, the problems perceived with the other aspects of SHORTTAG ? but it hasn't been the case since TC3 was published in 1998... - -- "Violence accomplishes nothing." What a contemptible lie! Raw, naked violence has settled more issues throughout history than any other method ever employed. Perhaps the city fathers of Carthage could debate the issue, with Hitler and Alexander as judges? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP SDK 3.0.3 iQA/AwUBQPPoQaPyPrIkdfXsEQImsACfV+a1csJirKdahXocy2j+gwQBtZoAoNVZ wPwBHNIuvycfKB/C32pxGRC5 =pjad -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Tuesday, 13 July 2004 06:48:50 UTC