Re: Is TARGET deprecated?

Gerald Oskoboiny wrote:
> 
> I've had a couple comments about the TARGET attribute missing
> from the strict DTD, asking if that was intentional. Was it?
> I checked the draft quickly and couldn't see it specifically
> being deprecated.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Gerald

This is understandably a bit confusing. The status of
Frames is not entirely clear except that they are not
deprecated. Nor are they entirely strict, however. While
Frames are not deprecated (and thus, the "target" attribute
is not either), they are not associated with the strict
DTD (otherwise they would be in the strict DTD and there
would only be two DTDs). Since it is likely that people
who use Frames will use them with the Transitional DTD,
the "target" attribute appears in the Transitional DTD
instead of the Strict DTD.

I admit that the status is not entirely clear, but
the Working Group chose to leave Frames in limbo to
a certain extent.

Ian


> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: "John T. Whelan" <whelan@mail.physics.utah.edu>
> Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 23:02:07 -0700
> To: gerald@w3.org
> Subject: Validator glitch
> 
> [...]
> 
> PS: I've noticed that the TARGET attribute was not included in HTML
> 4.0 Strict, which means that environmentally conscious frame documents
> (those that include TARGET="_top" when linking offsite) have to be
> tagged as HTML 4.0 Transitional.  (Of course the frameset documents
> themselves have to be HTML 4.0 Frameset.)  Do you happen to know if
> this is an intentional feature?

Received on Thursday, 8 January 1998 03:12:14 UTC