On Tue, 15 Dec 1998, Brian Gilkison wrote: > It is my understanding that a <NOSCRIPT>...</NOSCRIPT> definition > qualifies as a block-level element That is correct. The ultimate references are the DTDs, where NOSCRIPT occurs (apart from its own declaration) only in the declaration for the entity %block. This means that NOSCRIPT may only occur within an element for which the content model contains %block. See http://www.htmlhelp.com/reference/html40/block/noscript.html for an explicit list. The validator error message (referring to </P> for a P element which is not open) is adequate, but not always easy to understand. One needs to learn that NOSCRIPT is a block-level element and thereby has implicitly closed the open P element. I don't think there is much one could improve in the diagnostics, though. An attempt to keep track of implicitly closed P elements and to refer to such an element (which of them? the last one before the error?) when reporting to a homeless </P> might sometimes help the author in seeing the problem; but in other cases it might be very misleading. In practice, if an author wishes to write a paragraph where some text fragment is either generated by a client-side script or a static fallback (for situations where client-side scripting is not supported or not enabled), it seems that one needs to write alternatives for the entire paragraph. That is, there would be a SCRIPT element which generates the paragraph and a NOSCRIPT element which contains the static fallback. Yucca, http://www.hut.fi/u/jkorpela/ or http://yucca.hut.fi/yucca.htmlReceived on Tuesday, 15 December 1998 02:37:57 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:58:11 UTC