|
|
Posted by rf on 11/27/97 11:57
andreas.usenet@html.dk wrote:
>without attribution rf wrote:
>> " In this tutorial you will learn so-called XHTML (Extensible HyperText
>> Mark-up Language) which, in short, is a new and more well-structured way
>> of
>> writing HTML. "
>>
>> Hmmm. Not quite. Read the archives for more info.
>
> As a short description I don't see any problems in this formulation.
> Please let me know where you see the problem. Maybe "way of writing
> HTML" could be changed to "reformulation of HTML"?
XHTML is not a reformulation of HTML. It is merely HTML expressed in XML
rather than SGML.
You fail to mention that the major browser out there (IE) simply does not
understand XHTML and will error correct it to HTML. Provide a properly
served XHMTL page to IE and it will invite you to download it, not display
it.
>> "HTML is tags - and nothing but tags. To learn HTML is to learn and use
>> different tags."
>>
>> Nothing could be more wrong IMHO.
>> This is where I gave up on your tutorial.
>
>
> I am sorry to hear that. Again, I don't want to make it too complicated
> to start with. And I don't think there is anything wrong in that
> formulation. The element is part of the tag,
Wrong. The tag is part of the element.
Consider a paragraph element. It starts with a <p> tag. It then has some
[optional] content. Then it ends with a closing </p> tag. Quite clear.
[element] == [start tag][content][close tag].
> which is explained later
> in the tutorial:
Didn't get that far.
> "The basic part of a tag is called an element (for example the p in
> <p>).
The basic part of a tag?
Oh my. Sorry but how wrong.
>Thus, a tag consists of either just an element (for example <p>),
> or an element plus one or more attributes (for example <p
> style="background-color:#ff0000;">). Simple as that."
Nope. Just wrong. Simply wrong.
Slide over to the specifications (you know where they are). Read them again.
Them read them again. Then see if your "tag centric" approach works.
> Thanks for your comments.
NP
--
Richard.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|