- From: Paul Prescod <papresco@technologist.com>
- Date: Wed, 09 Jul 1997 16:59:52 -0400
- To: Steven Champeon <schampeo@hesketh.com>
- CC: PatrickMc@usa.net, Jordan Reiter <jreiter@mail.slc.edu>, www-html@w3.org
Steven Champeon wrote: > I ought to knock you for not clearly specifying > that "abcd" as used above was of course merely a placeholder for #PCDATA. > And the question arises, is <P>abcd</P> really the complete element, > since it can contain #PCDATA? What about those elements which do not > allow #PCDATA but which allow #CDATA? I'm not sure I understand what you're talking about above. Are you just kidding around? "abcd" was a placeholder for any string of legal character data including "#PCDATA", "FOO" and "BAR". Yes, I think that the element above is a complete element. #CDATA is not an SGML keyword or HTML element. > We're talking about the difference between referring to something in > theory and in practice. And <P> is the worst example, since it has > been the center of so much controversy over its proper use. I don't know that there has been any contraversy over the use of the HTML paragraph element for several years since it became a container. I know that there has been a contraversy over the *implementation* because some people at Netscape didn't know the difference between a "tag" and an "element". That is reason enough for me to be careful about this issue. I'm surprised that the HTML authors here who have been burned by that screw-up are not all uniformly careful about the issue. Paul Prescod
Received on Wednesday, 9 July 1997 17:03:06 UTC