Re: lynx-dev A Missing >...

[Patrick]

In "Re: lynx-dev A Missing >..."
[02/Aug/2000 Wed 13:20:36]
Klaus Weide wrote:

> On Mon, 24 Jul 2000, pAb-032871 wrote:
> > Thomas Dickey wrote:
[...]
> > > > I don't think this is the best way.  It may also prematurely end the
> > > > SCRIPT contents on '</SOMETHING' that isn't '</SCRIPT', and while that's
> > > > not valid input (any '</SOMETHING' in the script content should have 
> > > > been
> >                  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > > > written with some form of escaping), it is probably more useful to 
> > > > continue
> >     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > Not neccesarily.  See below.
> 
> The HTML 4.01 Specification disagrees with you:
> 
>    Linkname: Performance, Implementation, and Design Notes
>         URL: http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/appendix/notes.html#h-B.3.2.1

Ah, sorry.  I refer to the specs pretty often, but haven't read the
whole thing[s]. . .  You see a lot of "temporary delete" comments,
containing markup and </TAGS>, presumably where people *think* they
want something out of their HTML but haven't quite decided yet.

> > > shouldn't the tag end when it sees a new "<", unless it's quoted?
> > 
> > This would cause some problems if there was some kind of
> >     if(whatever){
> >     document.write("<B>bold text</B>")
> >     }
> > content in the script itself. . .  
> 
> And indeed that's invalid.  If the language is something like Javascript,
> it can be written as
>        document.write("<B>bold text<\/B>")
> or
>        document.write("<B>bold text<" + "/B>")
> instead.

Thanks.  As above, I see enough invalid HTML that it looks normal
to me [umm, invalid *scripting* this time].

> > Unless this is what you meant by "quoted".
> 
> I meant the backslash.

Taken from the other message:

> > I meant the backslash.
> 
> Sorry, forget THAT remark... It was Tom who wrote "unless it's quoted"
> (as quoted above :) ), and he explained later what he meant.
> 
>   Klaus

It was still a good point.  Not the *same* point, but still a good
one.  Thanks.

> > Also, it's generally recomended that anything between <SCRIPT>
> > tags be commented-out so browsers that don't support scripting
> > won't try to display a bunch of JavaScript gibberish in source
> > form.  That doesn't guarantee it's going to happen, but most of
> > the HTML source I've seen has been pretty good about it.
> > 
> > A very simple example:
> > 
> > <SCRIPT LANGUAGE="JavaScript1.1">
> > <!-- Begin hiding from non-scriptable browsers
> > document.write("some HTML\, including <TAGS> and")
> > document.write("<TAG ATTRIBUTE=\"value\">")
> > // End -->
> > </SCRIPT>
> > 
> > These sorts of <!-- comments --> are allowed within scripts, because
> > JavaScript recognizes them as commenting-out *only one line*.
> > The "//" comment is needed at the end, however.
> > 
> > It's a valid comment in HTML, 
> 
> No, it isn't parsed as a comment in HTML.  It's CDATA.  CDATA isn't
> parsed for SGML comment declarations.
> 
> This is only for browsers that don't understand that SCRIPT (and
> STYLE) content has to be parsed differently from other elements.
> It isn't necessary for lynx (of any recent version).
> 
> > except that some browsers might
> > begin rendering everything after "some HTML\, including <TAGS>"
> > [including Lynx if its HTML-parsing options are set to do that],
> 
> I doubt it.  Have you tried it?

I was talking about a comment-parsing option from lynx.cfg:

# If HISTORICAL_COMMENTS is TRUE, Lynx will revert to the "Historical"
# behavior of treating any '>' as a terminator for comments, instead of
# seeking a valid '-->'
[...]

but I didn't know Lynx treats things differently within <SCRIPT>
tags.  You're right.  This:
        <TITLE>comment test</TITLE>
        <!-- this shouldn't appear HTML >
        this shouldn't appear either HTML -->
        <P> end test 1<P>
        <SCRIPT>
        <!--
        this shouldn't appear JS >
        nor should this JS
        -->
        </SCRIPT>
        <P>just checking ...

Was rendered as this, even with HISTORICAL_COMMENTS set TRUE:

   this shouldn't appear either HTML -->
   
   end test 1
   
   just checking ...

"nor should this JS" was nowhere to be seen.  :-)



                          Patrick
                <mailto:address@hidden>

; To UNSUBSCRIBE: Send "unsubscribe lynx-dev" to address@hidden