- From: Benjamin Franz <snowhare@netimages.com>
- Date: Fri, 8 Sep 1995 07:27:23 -0700 (PDT)
- To: www-html@w3.org
Something that has bothered me for a long time now is the decision to not allow <PRE><TABLE>...</TABLE></PRE>. I tried looking in the archives but didn't immediately find out why this was done. It appears clear to me that in the real world of badly broken content negotiation and a general unwillingness to maintain two documents whith the sole difference being the use of HTML 3 TABLE, <PRE><TABLE>...</TABLE></PRE> would provide a much more robust transition strategy from HTML 2 to HTML 3. By specifying a line break above and below <TABLE>...</TABLE> and that within the TABLE a wrapper <PRE> </PRE> is ignored, better than 90% of all tables I have seen could be easily maintained for both HTML 2 and HTML 3 - without requiring content negotiation to actually work. Any arguments about potentially causing older browsers to break with illegally included markup in the table is pretty moot - <TABLE>...</TABLE> does a pretty good job of breaking old browsers right now. Almost no pages now using tables are even comprehensible in a browser that doesn't understand <TABLE>...</TABLE> - and most of those that are comprehensible are because of using the (currently illegal) method of <PRE><TABLE>...</TABLE></PRE>. The cases where a legal HTML 3 table would be illegal HTML 2 are far rarer than tables than can not be viewed *at all* right now in many browsers. What compelling arguments are there against changing the allowed context of tables to allow <PRE><TABLE>...</TABLE></PRE>? -- Benjamin Franz
Received on Friday, 8 September 1995 10:15:46 UTC