- From: Harold A. Driscoll <harold@driscoll.chi.il.us>
- Date: Tue, 19 Dec 1995 20:21:57 +0000
- To: Chuck Foster <chuck@pipex.net>
- Cc: www-html@w3.org
At 12:53 19/12/95 +0000, you wrote: >Hi, > >I seem to have started an argument over the definition of paragraphs - oops! > >However, nobody actually answered my query about where the <p> / </p> >should be used, in relation to things like <ul>, <ol>, even <form> etc! Have you looked at the charts HALSoft has prepared? For example, with the 2.0 DTD, http://www.halsoft.com/sgml/html-2.0/html-2.0-index.html , they show: P Required Parts <P>characters... All Parts <P>characters... <A> <IMG> <BR> <EM> <STRONG> <CODE> <SAMP> <KBD> <VAR> <CITE> <TT> <B> <I> </P> Allowed In Content Of... <ADDRESS> <BLOCKQUOTE> <BODY> <DD> <FORM> <LI> >I try to use </P> generally, though I know it is optional - I might >start to omit it in order to make some documents smaller (well its >four bytes shorter per paragraph!). However, its where it *is* needed >and where <p> should be used that confuses me. One thing which confuses the issue is that certain popular browsers (eg. Netscape) often render their display diffently depending on whether the </P> is explicitly stated or is omitted. Sadly, pragmatic considerations confuse the issue. Another thought is that while the location of an implied </P> can be determined, such a parser is hardly a trivial matter. I can envision a number of applications where a prepass parser might insert all the implied paragraph end tags. This "normalized" format could then allow much easier subsequent manipulation. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Harold A. Driscoll mailto:harold@driscoll.chi.il.us #include <std/disclaimer> http://homepage.interaccess.com/~driscoll/
Received on Tuesday, 19 December 1995 15:18:55 UTC