- From: Richard Norman <normri@samc.com>
- Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 12:56:52 -0800
- To: <roconnor@Math.Berkeley.EDU>, <www-html@w3.org>
One other thing I would like to say about this is that in reading the section of the specification, the "most" of the browsers have taken the clearer high road as opposed to the technically correct road. Taken from the spec mentioned... Some SGML SHORTTAG constructs save typing but add no expressive capability to the SGML application. Although these constructs technically introduce no ambiguity, they reduce the robustness of documents, especially when the language is enhanced to include new elements. So in a sense they are cleaning up the spec where the the root specification can not (since HTML and XHTML are based upon SGML, they can not remove these shortcuts from their root I believe) So anyway, I am glad to fully know this now. Thanks for the info.. Richard Norman -----Original Message----- From: "Russell O'Connor" <roconnor@Math.Berkeley.EDU> Sent: Monday, December 30, 2002 1:15 PM To: W3C HTML <www-html@w3.org> Subject: RE: Promotion of XHTML _____BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE_____ Hash: SHA1 [To: www_html@w3.org] On Mon, 30 Dec 2002, Peter Foti (PeterF) wrote: > Also, if <br /> in HTML was equivalent to <br>>, then that would seem to > indicate that every web browser out there is broken, and should display this > as a line break followed by the greater than symbol. I don't know what > logic you are using to determine that <br /> = <br>>, but it seems flawed > to me. Borris is correct. Observe: > sgmlnorm _d _c ~/sgml/catalog ~/sgml/15445/15445.dcl "<osfd>0" sgmlnorm:/home/u2/grad/roconnor/sgml/15445/15445.dcl:28:33:W: characters in the document character set with numbers exceeding 65535 not supported <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "ISO/IEC 15445:2000//DTD HyperText Markup Language//EN"> <HTML><HEAD><TITLE>TEST</TITLE><BODY><P>break<br />ing</P></BODY></HTML> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "ISO/IEC 15445:2000//DTD HyperText Markup Language//EN"> <HTML> <HEAD> <TITLE>TEST</TITLE> </HEAD> <BODY> <P>break<BR>>ing</P> </BODY> </HTML> As you see, sgmlnorm parses <br /> as <BR>>. The same thing will happen if you use HTML 4.01 instead of ISO_HTML. Most popular browsers fail to follow the requirements indicated by Section B.3.7 of the HTML 4.01 recommendation. It blows my mind that the W3C seems to bury it's head in the sand about the <br /> issues with ``compatibility'' between XHTML and HTML. I just don't understand what they were thinking when they came up with such plainly false claims of compatibility. _ __ Russell O'Connor < HYPERLINK "http://www.math.berkeley.edu/~roconnor/" \nhttp://www.math.berkeley.edu/~roconnor/> ``[Law enforcement officials] suggested that the activists were stopped not because their names are on the list, but because their names resemble those of suspected criminals or terrorists.'' __ SFGate.com _____BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE_____ Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (SunOS) iQCVAwUBPhC3T00+aO5oRkNZAQKVFwQAo0kvCuJQU9cDaM4ovqdnOZdCxOhPb+tt hhPV8807ZtNLN5eo67yc1U0KTut9I7Iqi0oYCHA2GUiGsyVOcDDttvEZPTWsUK6P HXkK4ZkSYCQ8BA7vF/MAeeap2vU4pGF7FhPOoZINOmzL1wt9+ntRsroaTQSW1uyC FZUZCn1saLM= =RCfG _____END PGP SIGNATURE_____ --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system ( HYPERLINK "http://www.grisoft.com" \nhttp://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.434 / Virus Database: 243 - Release Date: 12/25/2002 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.434 / Virus Database: 243 - Release Date: 12/25/2002 ************************************************************************************************** The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential. It is intended for the named recipient(s) only. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager or the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any one or make copies. **************************************************************************************************
Received on Tuesday, 7 January 2003 15:57:43 UTC