Re: still too early for XHTML :-((
Petr Stehlik <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.java.enhydra.xmlc |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On St, 2003-04-09 at 15:29, Jacob Kjome wrote: > In order to prove it is a hack It's not real hack but it is a browser specific workaround. Remember when I suggested to add an empty space before "/>" in order to make it more browser compatible? And Mark D. said that it's not necessary, that I can as well go for real HTML if I have problems with XHTML in browsers.. > point out which other element this affects. It is only a "hack" to do > <script></script> in the sense that you feel you shouldn't have to. right. > Doing <script /> breaks the rules set by HTML4.01 so doing anything > other than <script></script> is just wrong even though <script /> is > valid XML syntax. XHTML1.0 obeys more specific rules than generic > XML. Sounds like you consider XHTML 1.0 buggy as IMHO it allows the <script/> syntax. I personally don't care. As you might have read in latest message from me, I patched enhydra in order to get <script></script> and nothing else as I simply have to support IE and I want to feed it with XHTML. And my tests confirmed that this is the way to go - everything seems to work OK in both IE and Mozilla (Opera 7.03 is another story). All I want to achieve is to be able to use *unmodified* Enhydra releases so my main aim is to get all my patches accepted by the Enhydra/XMLC maintainers. If you all are happy with the <script></script> specific support and will add it to XMLC CVS ASAP then I am more than happy. > > this wasn't about doctype. Enhydra didn't allow me to include "ID" > > to <TITLE>. Latest XHTML 1.0 allows that. > Why would you want to do that? Got HTML files from our designer and the XMLC couldn't compile it. He told me his files are 100% OK and really - the validator agreed. So I had to fix the compiler, that's obvious. > Ok, I've never actually compiled my markup as XHTML. So you are > saying that without doing anything on your own, you get a doctype set > at the top of your page upon output? yes. But I can't swear that this doctype is generated by enhydra - it might as well be leftover from the original html file. In the XHTML mode the XMLC preserves the original layout. It is very unusual - compared to the one longish line (the HTML output from XMLC/Enhydra). > mistyped because "text/html" is obviously a "content type" that's the thing in the header of the data stream. When it was "text/xml" browsers didn't work (javascript couldn't handle forms etc). The first few lines of my dynamically generated pages are as follows: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> > > > > 6) URLRewriter does not work > > > > > > What was the issue with this one? I don't remember. > > > > URLRewriter is not called since the XHTML page is instanceof > > XMLObject. > > I posted a longish thread (replying to myself most of the time) > > about > > all that one or two weeks ago. > > I think you mean "is *not* an instance of XMLObject", right? No. It _is_ an instance of that. Please find my original message posted here less than 10 days ago. Petr