- From: Arnoud <galactus@htmlhelp.com>
- Date: Sun, 08 Sep 1996 19:24:20 +0200
- To: www-html@w3.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In article <Pine.LNX.3.91.960908201955.12881A-100000@fizzgig.glasswings.com.au>, Stuart Young <nakor@glasswings.com.au> wrote: > On Sat, 7 Sep 1996, Arnoud Galactus Engelfriet wrote: > > 1. How do you restrict the contents of inlined HTML to something > > that does not invalidate the document it is inlined into? > > Well, you could either allow only 'specific' tags in an inlined HMTL > file, which gets messy to regulate, or, treat it as a whole new document, > nested as it were in the the current document. A bit hard to formalize, IMO. Since HTML 3.2 allows you to set document colors, how can you prevent people from setting those in an "inline" document? > > 2. How do you prevent things like opening tags in the main file > > and the closing tags in the included file? > > Using the nested file scenario, this could never happen. Agreed, but then you're doing something different. This would be like frames, with a separate document displayed inline like an image. What I am talking to is inlining a la server-side includes. Then you insert pieces of text & HTML markup *in* the actual document you're sending. This would be very useful (no need to put a load on the server doing the processing, only having to cache that standard header & footer once...) but causes the problems I mention. > Note: there will have to be some way of differentiating between HTML and > TEXT at the tag level though, as display of inline text with < and >'s in > it could become a REAL problem for a browser that isn't aware that it's > different. Having inline text a la GIFs would make this easy.. just draw a box of the appropriate size and render the text in that. The content-type should identify it as plain text, so the < and > should not get interpreted. Galactus - -- E-mail: galactus@htmlhelp.com .................... PGP Key: 512/63B0E665 Maintainer of WDG's HTML reference: <http://www.htmlhelp.com/reference/> -----END PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Received on Sunday, 8 September 1996 13:31:57 UTC