In article <3d33fa29@news.povray.org> , "Chris Cason" 
<new### [at] deletethispovrayorg> wrote:

> This seems only to happen in Mozilla, and is most strange - Mozilla seems to
> think that any tag of the form '<a name="Something">' without a closing '</a>'
> implies that all the following text should be displayed as a link ...

They are, as in many other case, over-interpreting the HTML 4 "Standard".
So, again the holly and unfailable master teachers of proper web design in
the Mozilla development group force the specification on the user no matter
what the cost.  Hence the obvious is not to use intentionally broken
browsers like Mozilla!

Or, IMO the problem is the (only self-appointed after all!) W3C which exists
as industry self-interest defending group outside reliable and responsible
acting organizations (i.e. ISO committees).  Instead, the W3C is obviously
the battleground certain companies like to play with users instead being
concerned about them.  And on this way they forgot one of the most important
principles, already stated in as ancient documents as the IP and TCP
specifications:

"In general, an implementation must be conservative in its sending behavior,
and liberal in its receiving behavior."

But who cares about putting something like this into any of the W3C
documents?  Nobody, because good and useful "standards" are obviously not
their priority.  Instead, they take the most convenient way and say behavior
is undefined.  In conclusion, only giant boating of so-called "standards"
with useless features is what they do all day long :-(

    Thorsten

____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde

Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org

Post a reply to this message

In article <3d33ff8e@news.povray.org> , "Tom Melly" <tom### [at] tomandlucouk> 
wrote:

> presumably <br/> rather than <br>

No, that is completely wrong!

    Thorsten

____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde

Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org

Post a reply to this message

"Thorsten Froehlich" <tho### [at] trfde> wrote in message
news:3d340c1b@news.povray.org...
> In article <3d33ff8e@news.povray.org> , "Tom Melly" <tom### [at] tomandlucouk>
> wrote:
>
> > presumably <br/> rather than <br>
>
> No, that is completely wrong!
>

Really?

from: http://www.shorewalker.com/pages/xhtml_overview-1.html

"XHTML does ask you to change your current HTML documents, but it doesn't ask
the world. Your documents will need some alien-looking new headers; you must put
quote marks around tag attributes; the humble break tag, <br>, now becomes <br
/>, and so on. But a good search-and-replace tool will take care of much of the
XHTML transformation. And Web sites that already create pages out of templates
and databased content using code-based editing tools will find the
transformation particularly easy."

Post a reply to this message

Tom Melly <tom### [at] tomandlucouk> wrote:
> In any case, even tags that don't require a
> closing tag should now end with /> (presumably <br/> rather than <br> )

  That's not standard HTML.
  It's that way if you are writing XML (or apparently XHTML) but not HTML.
I think that in HTML that would be a syntax error.

-- 
#macro N(D)#if(D>99)cylinder{M()#local D=div(D,104);M().5,2pigment{rgb M()}}
N(D)#end#end#macro M()<mod(D,13)-6mod(div(D,13)8)-3,10>#end blob{
N(11117333955)N(4254934330)N(3900569407)N(7382340)N(3358)N(970)}//  - Warp -

Post a reply to this message

Thorsten Froehlich <tho### [at] trfde> wrote:
> They are, as in many other case, over-interpreting the HTML 4 "Standard".
> So, again the holly and unfailable master teachers of proper web design in
> the Mozilla development group force the specification on the user no matter
> what the cost.  Hence the obvious is not to use intentionally broken
> browsers like Mozilla!

  I don't understand. If Mozilla sticks to the standard, how is it "broken"?

  Besides, it makes sense. A link starts with the <a> tag and ends with
the </a> tag. Leaving the </a> tag out is a syntax error. What should the
browser do in this case? The most correct behaviour would be, of course, to
issue an error message and refuse to show the page at all. Of course they
want to be a bit more user-friendly than that.
  If a page has a syntax error, who defines which is the correct behaviour?
Microsoft?

-- 
#macro M(A,N,D,L)plane{-z,-9pigment{mandel L*9translate N color_map{[0rgb x]
[1rgb 9]}scale<D,D*3D>*1e3}rotate y*A*8}#end M(-3<1.206434.28623>70,7)M(
-1<.7438.1795>1,20)M(1<.77595.13699>30,20)M(3<.75923.07145>80,99)// - Warp -

Post a reply to this message

"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message news:3d341d0d@news.povray.org...
> Tom Melly <tom### [at] tomandlucouk> wrote:
> > In any case, even tags that don't require a
> > closing tag should now end with /> (presumably <br/> rather than <br> )
>
>   That's not standard HTML.
>   It's that way if you are writing XML (or apparently XHTML) but not HTML.
> I think that in HTML that would be a syntax error.
>

I was under the impression that xml-complient html was now considered a "good
thing".

cgi.pm for example ( a perl-module) will write <br /> and so on by default in
latest versions.

Follow-ups set.

Post a reply to this message

"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message news:3d341e7e@news.povray.org...
>   Besides, it makes sense. A link starts with the <a> tag and ends with
> the </a> tag. Leaving the </a> tag out is a syntax error. What should the

Not really. Browsers are expected to have the ability to infer a closing
tag when one should obviously be there. A good example would be the sequence
<tr><td>Some Text</tr>. I have left out a </td>, but any browser will infer
its presence and act as if it were supplied. This is a defined behaviour for
HTML browsers (or anything that can understand HTML).

In the case of the anchor tag with type NAME (e.g. <a name="">), there is
no 'link', as you refer above; it's an anchor, not a link, and in this case
there is no possibility of having any linked text (e.g. "<a name="foo">text</a>"
doesn't make sense).

In that case, the presence of a "</a>" is implied immediately after the <a ...>,
simply because it can't be any other way. This is the way browsers have worked
since the start, to my knowledge, and one that doesn't work that way is IMO
broken (and I don't care what the standards say, it's broken).

-- Chris

Post a reply to this message

"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message news:3d341e7e@news.povray.org...
>   I don't understand. If Mozilla sticks to the standard, how is it "broken"?

BTW the question is open as to whether or not it's standard behaviour; I didn't
say that it was, and I didn't say it wasn't. I haven't looked it up.

-- Chris

Post a reply to this message

In article <3d341e7e@news.povray.org> , Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg>  wrote:

>   I don't understand. If Mozilla sticks to the standard, how is it "broken"?

Well, we could write POV-Ray 4 to expect compilers supporting the "export"
keyword in C++ and thus stick to the standard.  Get the idea?

>   Besides, it makes sense. A link starts with the <a> tag and ends with
> the </a> tag. Leaving the </a>

That is not really the problem.  the problem is that the a tag is overloaded
with two different meanings.  One is the "href" and the other the "name"
type.  They should have been two distinct tags, but unfortunately aren't the
end tags for the "name" variant of the a tag does absolutely nothing useful
and only adds clutter.  Plus it would be no problem to handle it correctly.
So why add user inconvenience.  After all, HTML was not meant as a machine
only format; it it had been there there would be no need for tags which only
consume space but a more efficient binary format could be use (one of the
many points by XML is so useless).

    Thorsten

____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde

Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org

Post a reply to this message

Chris Cason <new### [at] deletethispovrayorg> wrote:
> In the case of the anchor tag with type NAME (e.g. <a name="">), there is
> no 'link', as you refer above; it's an anchor, not a link, and in this case
> there is no possibility of having any linked text (e.g. "<a name="foo">text</a>"
> doesn't make sense).

  I tested with a page like this:

<html>
<head><title>Test</title></head>
<body>
<p>Line1
<a name="test1">
<p>Line2
<p>Line3
<a name="test2">test
<p>Line4
<p>Line5
</body>
</html>

  With Mozilla I don't see any odd behaviour. None of the text is underlined
or anything else. Everything seems to work as it should.
  Could someone give me a (small) example where the reported misbehaviour
happens?

-- 
#macro N(D)#if(D>99)cylinder{M()#local D=div(D,104);M().5,2pigment{rgb M()}}
N(D)#end#end#macro M()<mod(D,13)-6mod(div(D,13)8)-3,10>#end blob{
N(11117333955)N(4254934330)N(3900569407)N(7382340)N(3358)N(970)}//  - Warp -

Post a reply to this message