- From: David Woolley <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
- Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2002 18:35:37 +0000 (GMT)
- To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
> Could someone expand on why CDATA is essential? > > our page* validates fine without it, yet when I include it the page no > longer appears to load :-( ie5.2 mac mozilla20021115 mac ie6 pc The script is within an XHTML comment. The CDATA markup prevents the recognition of this as a comment. The HTML DTD declares script content to be CDATA, but XML requires that a parse be possible without the DTD, so CDATA must be indicated explicitly in line, and cannot be in the DTD. Any browser that honours the script is not treating the resource as XHTML, which is probably reasonable as neither the HTTP header nor the meta element claim that it is. Note that it should not validate, as it contains elements that are not in the DTD, and has missing quotes which make it not even well formed. There's a broken fragment link (src=#). There are bogus javascript:'s at the start of the event handlers - I guess this parses as an unused label. Is some browser really treating meta reply-to as a sneaky link element, and accepting URLs. Even if it were a valid http-equiv, the standard RFC use of Reply-To headers does not include a mailto: scheme prefix! There is a perfectly good link element notation for this, although it dropped out of the specs because no major browser implemented it (Mozilla now does): <link rev="made" href="mailto:xzxx@kfadf.example.com">. The scripting appears to be IE specific. Not sure what this has to do with accessibility.
Received on Sunday, 24 November 2002 13:35:47 UTC