W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > April 2005

[whatwg] <p> elements containing other block-level elements

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 09:31:56 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0504120926550.20461@dhalsim.dreamhost.com>
On Tue, 12 Apr 2005, Lachlan Hunt wrote:
> >
> > We haven't discussed it yet. I hadn't really thought about it but given:
> > 
> >    <pre><code> ... </code></pre>
> >    <blockcode> ... </blockcode>
> To use <pre><code> like <blockcode>, one would have to style it with
>   pre>code:only-child { display: block; }

Hm? Why?

> > I think we'll probably be "stuck" with HTML for a very long time -- at 
> > least as long as it takes for XML to have a variant created that has 
> > well-defined error handling rules other than the author-hostile "abort 
> > processing immediately".
> I don't understand what's wrong with the XML error handling.  I think 
> it's great because errors should be caught and handled during the 
> authoring process and by the CMS, which XML essentially forces.

Many people feel that a minor typo in their document should not cause 
their page to stop rendering altogether. I have spoken with a _lot_ of 
authors who really do not like XML's draconian error handling, including 
many authors who are always ensuring their documents are valid.

I myself have occasionally made typos and other mistakes that, if I had 
used XML, would have left my site unusable, without my knowledge, for 
several hours at a time.

Personally I don't have a strong opinion; so long as the error handling is 
defined I don't really mind if it is draconian or error recovery.

Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Tuesday, 12 April 2005 02:31:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:58:40 UTC