[rfc-i] Normalized HTML

Phillip Hallam-Baker hallam at gmail.com
Wed Mar 28 08:19:21 PDT 2012


Well strictly speaking, <t> does not nest inside itself in the XML2RFC format.

But I really can't understand why anyone thought that lists should be
enclosed in a <t> like they are.

And no. I do not accept the idea that more understanding of document
design would make me see that differently as has been suggested to me
when I have raised it in the past. Rather, the fact that someone tried
to pull that 'expertise' bullshit on me of all people tends to suggest
they have rather less understanding than they think.


On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 4:52 AM, Iljitsch van Beijnum
<iljitsch at muada.com> wrote:
> On 28 Mar 2012, at 10:46 , Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>
>>> <p>
>>> bla blah blah
>>> we don't close paragraph tags!
>
>> Please no. Life is hard enough without well-formed XHTML.
>
> So do we impose rules on authors to make life easier for the tools or the other way around?
>
> But I guess the <p> issue isn't important, if they need to be closed that's doable. It's the nested <t>s in the XML that are much more difficult, but these are no longer necessary if we use <h1> / <h2> type headings rather than derive the nesting from the <t>s.
>
> Note that the point here is not to make perfect HTML, but to encode meta data in something that is still mostly plain text, and getting that reflowable version in a browser as a bonus. So for instance we can be more strict than HTML and require that all tags occupy an entire line and start at the first character, so they can be filtered out extremely easily. Or relax HTML if that provides a compelling benefit. (But only then.)
> _______________________________________________
> rfc-interest mailing list
> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest



-- 
Website: http://hallambaker.com/


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list