- From: Ernest Cline <ernestcline@mindspring.com>
- Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2003 04:43:54 -0500
- To: "W3C HTML List" <www-html@w3.org>
> [Original Message] > From: Lachlan Hunt <lhunt07@postoffice.csu.edu.au> > > > Maybe <blockcode> should be either: > 1. <!ELEMENT blockcode (blockcode, l)*> > 2. <!ELEMENT blockcode (PCDATA | blockcode | Inline)*> > > Remember, the content model for <l> is > <!ELEMENT l (#PCDATA | Inline)*> > so there is no restriction on using Inline elements for either of these > two options. > I prefer version 1, since it is more strict and forces more structure > than version 2, though anything that's valid for version 1 MUST > also be valid for version 2 (since <l> is an Inline element). Of course, that raises the question of whether <l> should be an Inline element. It is already noted as an issue that as an Inline element, the following code is valid, if semantically ridiculous. <l>When is a <l>line</l> a </l>line</l>?</l> IMO <l> needs to be moved out of the Inline Module and into the Block Module with elements that have a content model of: (PCDATA | Inline)* changed so that their content model is: (PCDATA | Inline | l)* (Alternatively, the content model of <l> needs to be changed to exclude <l> which would be simpler from the viewpoint of implementation, but I think that while <l> is not quite a block nor an inline element, it is more blockish than inlinish.
Received on Sunday, 9 November 2003 04:44:03 UTC