Re: HTML and end tags
Bert Bos <bert@let.rug.nl>
Message-id: <9401071501.AA18562@freya.let.rug.nl>
From: Bert Bos <bert@let.rug.nl>
Subject: Re: HTML and end tags
To: koblas@netcom.com (David Koblas)
Date: Fri, 7 Jan 1994 16:01:28 +0100 (MET)
Cc: www-talk@www0.cern.ch
In-reply-to: <199401071214.EAA11635@mail.netcom.com> from "David Koblas" at Jan 7, 94 04:14:21 am
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL13]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 1521
|As best I understand HTML has some optional end tags for markup.
|(i.e. it is optional to have a </P> after a <P>).
|
|Since presently I'm writing a HTML syntax checker (actually full
|base parser), and I'm trying to track down all areas of "fuzzyness"
|in an HTML document. The <P> .. </P> is simply to ignore/understand,
|but things get a little problimatic when faced with:
| <A NAME="Some Nice Name">
|Since this is an anchor tag it really should have an </A> associated
|with it, but they don't. So at the very least this brings up the
According to the draft DTD for HTML+, the </a> end tag *is*
obligatory, unlike the </p>.
Since HTML+ will be defined by the DTD (unlike HTML, where a DTD was
added as an afterthought), there can be no "fuzzyness" in the syntax.
(Semantics is another matter.)
Btw., an HTML+ checker is nice, but why don't you use "sgmls"? It is
an SGML parser, so by implication it is also an HTML+ parser. In fact,
I use it routinely to check (and even generate!) the pages for our
soon to be announced WWW server.
Bert
--
_________________________________
/ _ Bert Bos <bert@let.rug.nl> |
() |/ \ Alfa-informatica, |
\ |\_/ Rijksuniversiteit Groningen |
\_____/| Postbus 716 |
| 9700 AS GRONINGEN |
| Nederland |
\_________________________________|