- From: Peter Sharpe <peter@sqwest.bc.ca>
- Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 19:15:00 -0700
- To: Charles@SGMLsource.com
- Cc: Paul Prescod <papresco@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca>, w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
On Oct 9, 1:44am, Charles F. Goldfarb wrote: > Here's how I would tell users to address these requirements using DTD-less > XML: > > Chapter 5. The CLEARDATA Tag. > > When you need to put scripts or other data in your document that isn't SGML, > you mark it with special tags called CLEARDATA tags (CDATA for short). > > The CLEARDATA start-tag is: <![CDATA[ > The CLEARDATA end-tag is: ]]> > An elegant solution. However, it doesn't solve the correct problem. I'm not so much talking about the case where you just want to escape some characters, but where you also want to label those characters. No semantic information other than "this is clear text" can be attached to the CLEARDATA start-tag (sic). So you need additional markup. This means that you are asking the HTML author, for example, to use markup like <SCRIPT><![CDATA[ ... var1 = "<EM>Hello world</EM>" ... ]]></SCRIPT> My point is that that kind of markup will be non-intuitive and considered completely unnecessary by the author. I might also note that Appendix B of the standard (B.13.1.1, the paragraph starting at 29) says that CDATA content is only ended by an end-tag which matches the start-tag (or ancestor!?). So the SGML committee must have considered that a good idea at one time. (Or the author of the appendix had an intuitive, but incorrect, understanding of CDATA declared content.) If there was a good reason why the committee changed its mind about that, I'd be very interested to hear it. Peter -- Peter Sharpe, Chief Scientist, SoftQuad Inc. Tel: +1 604 585 1999 ext. 312 #108-10070 King George Highway, Surrey, B.C., CANADA V3T 2W4 Fax: 585 1926 Internet: peter@sq.com or peter@sqwest.bc.ca World Wide Web: www.sq.com
Received on Tuesday, 8 October 1996 22:32:17 UTC