- From: Philip TAYLOR <P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
- Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 21:50:51 +0000
- CC: www-validator-css@w3.org
Jukka Korpela wrote: > I don't think it's off-topic. The answer is that IFRAME is also accepted > in HTML 4.01 Transitional. It is not allowed in HTML 4.01 Strict, which > is somewhat odd Yes, that is what was throwing me. I use Strict as a matter of course, and completely forgot (or never knew) that Transitional was more accepting in this respect. Of course, I don't want Transitional's leniency (I like to be warned of any deprecated usages), but short of using a custom DTD it looks as if I am stuck with Transitional for this project now that I need to start replacing whole pages of text in an efficient manner. > (and IFRAME is a respected citizen in HTML5 drafts), but > _this_ is off-topic (it's up to the people who defined the DTD). In HTML > 4.01 Strict, you can use OBJECT instead, but it's not quite the same > (most importantly, you cannot use the TARGET attribute to open a link in > an embedded OBJECT element as you can do for IFRAME). Not the last worried about TARGET, Jukka, but are there any other nasties waiting to bite me if I switch to <OBJECT> ? I already seem to have hit one nasty using IFRAME (a complete show-stopper, in fact) : my JavaScript DOM-walker doesn't seem able to recurse inside the IFRAME -- is this, too, to be expected, do you know ? Philip Taylor
Received on Tuesday, 10 January 2012 22:19:28 UTC