- From: Arnoud <galactus@stack.urc.tue.nl>
- Date: Sat, 27 Jul 1996 21:10:13 +0200
- To: www-html@w3.org
In article <199607262123.RAA25443@ebt-inc.ebt.com>, Arne Knudson <ack@ebt.com> wrote: > I've noticed that the Cougar DTD declares %A.content (the entity > describing the allowed content for the A element) as %text. The HTML 2.0 > DTD, though, has the following declaration: Funny, I never noticed that until you pointed this out. And yet, all the times where I wrapped <A NAME> around headers, I got complaints from validators. Hm. > instances of HTML 2.0, but fails under HTML 3.2. Was it a conscious decision > to remove %heading from %A.content, or would it be wiser to make HTML 3.2 > backwards compatable by using the same defininition (with %HTML.Recommended > and a default %A.content) as in the HTML 2.0 DTD? I think that since A is regarded as text-level markup, the heading would terminate the current block element, and the anchor inside it as well. IOW, A *can't* contain headers. Galactus -- To find out more about PGP, send mail with HELP PGP in the SUBJECT line to me. E-mail: galactus@stack.urc.tue.nl - Please PGP encrypt your mail if you can. Finger galactus@turtle.stack.urc.tue.nl for public key (key ID 0x416A1A35). Anonymity and privacy site: <http://www.stack.urc.tue.nl/~galactus/remailers/>
Received on Saturday, 27 July 1996 16:14:21 UTC