- From: Abigail <abigail@ny.fnx.com>
- Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 00:26:49 -0500 (EST)
- To: www-html@w3.org
Foteos Macrides wrote: ++ ++ The orginal question was what to do about ++ ++ <TT>teletype font</I> ++ ++ where the </I> is either a typo or an (ILLEGALLY!!!) interdigitated ++ end tag for an earlier <I> start tag. And that discussion basically ++ has been about whether tags can be treated as just switches, a la ++ the original NCSA Mosaics and the MCOM_oops_copyright_infringement_NCOM ++ browsers, or as SGML conformant markup. I'm suprised at what's being ++ claimed MSIE does with it, particularly if it's a version with style ++ sheet support, because that implies style sheets can be supported while ++ retaining "switch logic", and thus might not force NSN into greater ++ SGML compliance. Well, it has always surprised me why style sheets need the container model in stead of the switch model. A non-style sheet aware browser might treat '<I>' as "add 1 to italic counter", '</I>' as "decrement 1 from italic counter", and print the text in italics if the italic counter > 0. Now, with a style sheet, the I element can be configured to have blue background and 12 points font. Why do I need a container model for that? Just use 12 points and a blue background whenever italic counter > 0. Furthermore, does the model _matter_? Why should I care if the browser use a container model, or a tree, or switches? As long as it does the task right, (and reasonable efficient), that's ok, isn't? Abigail
Received on Thursday, 31 October 1996 00:25:07 UTC