- From: Olle Jarnefors <ojarnef@admin.kth.se>
- Date: Mon, 10 Jun 96 16:03:45 +0200
- To: www-html@w3.org
- Cc: Olle Jarnefors <ojarnef@admin.kth.se>
James Aylett <sja20@hermes.cam.ac.uk> wrote in <Pine.LNX.3.93.960609182551.22406D-100000@crystal.clare.cam.ac.uk>: > On Sun, 9 Jun 1996, Olle Jarnefors wrote: > > > The <ADDRESS> element isn't treated like the ordinary block > > elements in HTML 2.0, it can't be included in <P> or <LI> > > elements for example. This is still true in the HTML 3.2 DTD, as > It doesn't make sense to put <ADDRESS> within either, surely? The address > is something which comes after the body text, and so it must only be > within the <HTML> delimiters. I think it would sometimes make sense to put ADDRESS within a list. If a document has more than one author, it should be possible to include their addresses as list elements. RFC 1866 allows any number of ADDRESS elements anywhere at the top-level in the BODY element in HTML 2.0. The description of the semantics of the element type doesn't restrict it to the author(s) of the HTML document itself. It seems to be intended to be usable for any address: : The <ADDRESS> element contains such information as address, signature : and authorship, often at the beginning or end of the body of a : document. Considering this generality, I find the special prohibition against including ADDRESS elements in block-level elements puzzling. But I suppose there are good reasons. Does anybody know which? -- Olle Jarnefors, Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) <ojarnef@admin.kth.se>
Received on Monday, 10 June 1996 10:03:52 UTC