- From: Liam Quinn <liam@htmlhelp.com>
- Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2002 16:26:43 -0500 (EST)
- To: Jim Correia <correia@barebones.com>
- cc: W3C Validator <www-validator@w3.org>
On Thu, 4 Apr 2002, Jim Correia wrote: > On Thursday, April 4, 2002, at 04:12 PM, Liam Quinn wrote: > > > No. <table border> is actually equivalent to <table frame=border>. > > Note > > this comment from the HTML 4.01 DTD in describing the values for the > > "frame" attribute: > > > > The value "border" is included for backwards compatibility with > > <TABLE BORDER> which yields frame=border and border=implied > > For <TABLE BORDER=1> you get border=1 and frame=implied. In this > > case, it is appropriate to treat this as frame=border for backwards > > compatibility with deployed browsers. > > That is what the prose of the specification says. What I am trying to > understand is how the DTD knows this, and doesn't complain? It's SGML attribute minimization: just as you can use <p center> in place of <p align=center>, you can use <table border> in place of <table frame=border>. > Is the other obtuse error it reports for > > <table summary> > > actually just trying to tell me I should have supplied a value? It's saying that there is no attribute value (for minimization) named "summary". -- Liam Quinn
Received on Thursday, 4 April 2002 16:26:44 UTC