Re: A's content model

Daniel W. Connolly (
Wed, 21 Sep 94 23:15:03 EDT

In message <199409220122.SAA28254@rock>, Terry Allen writes:
>| In message <199409212335.QAA25549@rock>, Terry Allen writes:
>| >I've just been writing a piece in HTML and had trouble with
>| >anchors using Dan's 3 DTDs (or my 3in1.dtd derived from them).
>| >The content model for A assumes content
>| >and will not allow an omitted end tag (from html0.dtd).
>| ><!ENTITY % A.content "(%heading|%block|%text)+">
>| ><!ELEMENT A - - %A.content -(A)>
>| >However, the only way an A works properly as a target in Mosaic
>| >is if it is empty (has no end tag).
>| Not true. A works properly as long as there's something between
>| the A start tag and the A end tag. The idiom:
>| <A name="noContent"></A>
>| excercises what I'd like to call a bug in Mosaic.
> [ ... ]
>What is the bug? I'm trying to create targets for A
>links earlier in the same document, and I can't do it with:

Let me try again. Suppose we have:

<li><a href="#l1>src one</a>
<li><a href="#l2>dest two</a>
<li><a href="#l3>dest three</a>

<li><a name="l1">dest one: legal and works</a>
<li><a name="l2">dest two: illegal, but works
<li><a name="l3"></a>dest three: legal, but doesnt work

You will find:

link works with Mosaic parses by current DTD

I see no reason why link #3 shouldn't work. That it does not, I consider
a bug in Mosiac.

I also see no technical reason why link #2 shouldn't parse. But
it currently doesn't, and the sentiment is that it shouldn't,
on the grounds that allowing folks to omit </A> is confusing.